BEFORE THE TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES
In re
GARY GRAHAM,
Petitioner.
PETITION FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF
A REPRIEVE OF EXECUTION AND PARDON, OR
ALTERNATIVELY, A CONDITIONAL PARDON OR
COMMUTATION OF DEATH SENTENCE
Jack B. Zimmermann Richard H. Burr
Zimmermann & Lavine Burr & Welch
770 S. Post Oak Lane, Ste. 620 1630 Castle Court, #1
Houston, Texas 77056 Houston, Texas 77006
(713) 552-0300 (713) 523-2299
Counsel for Petitioner
c u
PETITION FOR RECOMMENDATION OF
A REPRIEVE OF EXECUTION AND PARDON, OR ALTERNATIVELY,
A CONDITIONAL PARDON OR COMMUTATION OF DEATH SENTENCE
Gary Graham’, through counsel, petitions the Texas Board of Pardons and
Paroles to recommend to the Honorable George W. Bush, Governor of the State of
Texas,
(a) that he grant a reprieve of Mr. Graham’s execution, now
scheduled for June 22, 2000, for 120 days to permit a full
and fair inquiry into the facts of Mr. Graham’s case, and
thereafter,
(b) that he grant a pardon, relieving Mr. Graham from his
wrongful conviction and death sentence.
In the alternative, Mr. Graham asks the Board to recommend to the Governor,
following the reprieve,
(c) _ that he grant a conditional pardon relieving Mr. Graham of
his conviction and death sentence upon the condition that he
waive double jeopardy protections and submit to a retrial, or
(d) that he grant a commutation of his death sentence.
In support of these requests, Mr. Graham presents the following information:
MR. GRAHAM'S PRESENT STATUS
Mr. Graham is an indigent, thirty-six year old African-American on death row,
'Mr. Graham has changed his name to Shaka Sankofa to honor his African heritage.
However, since he was known as Gary Graham throughout the legal process, he will be
7 referred to by this name in this petition.
Yy yy
Terrell Unit, Livingston, Texas, TDCJ # 000696, who was wrongfully convicted of capital
murder and sentenced to death in October, 1981.2. Mr. Graham’s conviction was
wrongful because he did not commit the capital murder for which he was convicted and
sentenced to death.
The state official responsible for confining and executing Mr. Graham is Gary
Johnson, Director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division.
By order of the 179th District Court of Harris County, Mr. Graham’s execution is set
for June 22, 2000, after the hour of 6:00 p.m. See Appendix 2.
THE REASON FOR PARDON OR ALTERNATIVE RELIEF:
A CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTIFICATION OF AN INNOCENT PERSON
AND THE FAILURE OF THE COURTS TO INTERVENE
Unless the Board intervenes, on June 22 a man who was mistakenly identified
by a single eye-witness will be executed in our state. A single eyewitness — who saw a
stranger’s face at night through an automobile windshield from a distance of 30-40 feet
FOR TWO SECONDS - was the only evidence that linked 17 year-old Gary Graham to
the killing of a man in a grocery store parking lot in Houston in 1981.
There was no evidence that Mr. Graham knew the victim, Bobby Lambert. He
had none of Lambert's property. None of Mr. Graham's fingerprints, blood, DNA, or hair
was found on Mr. Lambert or at'the scene. No physical or circumstantial evidence
whatsoever proved that Mr. Graham was at the crime scene.
Whetter one supports or opposes the death penalty, no person of reason
? The indictment, judgment, verdicts, and sentence are set forth in Appendix 1.
2
a ‘.
advocates executing an innocent person. We write to urge you, the members of the
Board of Pardons and Paroles, to intervene to prevent the execution of an innocent
person.
A. The Relevant Facts Reveal that Gary Graham Is Innocent
At approximately 9:30 p.m. on May 13, 1981, Bobby Grant Lambert purchased
$20 worth of items at the Safeway store at 8935 North Freeway in Houston, receiving
change from a $100 bill. As Mr. Lambert, a white man, walked across the parking lot to
his car, a young black man approached him from behind. After a brief confrontation
which appeared to some witnesses to involve an attempt to rob Mr. Lambert, the black
man shot Mr. Lambert and fled. Lambert had sixty $100 bills on his person. None was
taken. The $70-plus in change from Lambert’s purchase was never found.
1. The eyewitnesses
The evidence that Gary Graham did not commit this crime is rooted in the
investigation by the Houston Police Department. See Appendix 3 (Offense Report,
Houston Police Department). Five adult witnesses were identified by the police as
having seen the shooter — Bernadine Skillern, Daniel Grady, Wilma Amos, Ron
Hubbard, and Sherian Etuk.* All the eyewitnesses agreed on the accuracy of the
composite drawing made by a police artist with the help of Ms. Skillern. See Appendix
4 (composite of the suspect). All the eyewitnesses also agreed that the shooter was a
young black male, age 18-25, with a thin face, dark complexion, short Afro haircut, and
3Ms. Etuk’s name is misspelled as “Eluk” in the police report.
3
c c
no facial hair, who was wearing a white sport coat. Three of the eyewitnesses, Ms.
Skillern, Ms. Amos, and Mr. Grady, were called to testify at Mr. Graham’s trial. Ms.
Skillern described the events she saw and identified Mr. Graham as the shooter. Ms.
Amos testified about what she saw, said she could not remember what the shooter
looked like, but was never asked by either side whether she believed Mr. Graham was
the shooter.* Similarly, Mr. Grady, who had been in a car only a few feet from the
shooting, also described only the events he saw, and also testified that he could not
describe the shooter, but was not asked whether Mr. Graham was the shooter. Clearly,
if Amos or Grady had identified Mr. Graham, the prosecutor would have asked them
whether Mr. Graham was the shooter.
Of more significance is what the jury did NOT hear — and what no judge has
heard in a courtroom under oath, and then evaluated after cross-examination.
Ronald Hubbard, an employee of the grocery store, told the police he had first
seen the shooter near the front of the store as Hubbard went out to gather shopping
carts prior to the shooting, and then again, as the shooter was fleeing from the parking
lot after the shooting. He did not see the actual shooting. At the very same line-up
where Ms. Skillern picked out Mr. Graham, Mr. Hubbard told the police the shooter was
NOT in the line-up. The prosecutor let the trial defense lawyer see the offense report
°As Harris County District Attorney, Johnny Holmes, noted in 1993 in a press
release concerning Mr. Graham's case, "there is a difference between the ability to
recognize and the ability to describe." See Holmes' letter to Members of the Media,
April 28, 1993. Thus, even the District Attorney. concedes that Ms. Amos might have
recognized whether Mr. Graham was the shooter even though she may have been
unable to describe the shooter.
>) >
(Appendix 3) , which included Mr. Hubbard’s exclusion of Mr. Graham in the line-up
(Appendix 3, at pages 34-35).° However, the lawyer never interviewed Mr. Hubbard,
and he has never testified in court. Mr. Hubbard is a long-time employee of the United
States Postal Service and is an ordained minister. He has no criminal record.
One of the most compelling eyewitnesses, Sherian Etuk, a female cashier at the
store, saw the shooter just outside the store before he walked into the parking lot. She
had observed him only a few feet away for some time. She was no longer looking out
the front of the store at the moment of the shooting, but earlier she had clearly seen the
man in the white coat, whom everyone agreed was the shooter. See Appendix 8, {] 4
(affidavit of Sherian Etuk). Like the other eyewitnesses, she also told the police that the
composite drawing constructed by Ms. Skillern looked like the man she saw that night.
Id., 12. She told Mr. Graham's lawyers in 1993 that the shooter’s build reminded her
of her husband — who was 5'3" and weighed 130 pounds. /d., 710. As we have
‘The offense report minimizes the significance of Hubbard’s exclusion of Mr.
Graham by noting that Hubbard “indicated to [Detective] Ellis prior to the showup that he
did not get a look at the suspect's face at the time of the offense.” Appendix 3, at page 35.
However, Hubbard had been quite specific in describing to the police the shooter's
height and build —“5'5", 120-130 Ibs,” Appendix 3, at page 17 — and it was on the basis of
the lineup suspects’ build that Mr. Hubbard excluded Mr. Graham and all the others in the
lineup. See Appendix 5, J] 6 (Affidavit of Ronald Hubbard) (“I was unable to pick anyone
out of that group that reminded me physically of the guy that shot Mr. Lambert”).
_ Mr. Graham was 5'9" and weighed 150 pounds at the time of his arrest and
appearance in the lineup. See Appendix 6 (height and weight data for Mr. Graham). As
a photograph of the lineup, see Appendix 7, shows, all the participants in the lineup were
~-approximately the same height and weight. Having estimated the shooter's height as 5'5"
and weight as 120-130 pounds, Mr. Hubbard was correct in excluding everyone in the
lineup.
my ry
noted, Mr. Graham was 5'9" and weighed 150 pounds at the time of the shooting. Ms.
Etuk has never testified.
When shown a photo of Mr. Graham at age 17, Ms. Etuk was certain that Mr.
Graham was NOT the shooter. See Appendix 8, 7 11. As Ms. Etuk explained in her
affidavit,
[The shooter's] face was extremely narrow. Just thin from
top to bottom. It was not oval shaped. More like oblong...
| have been shown four photographs of Gary Graham that |
have signed, and they accompany this affidavit. One arrest
photo, two photos where Gary is in a lineup with other guys,
and one photo where he is dressed nice. None of these
photos depict the guy who shot the man out in the parking
lot that night. The guy who did it had a thinner face and
smaller build.
Appendix 8, {If 10, 11.
Ms. Etuk’s exclusion of Mr. Graham on the basis of his facial features — and even
her exclusion on the basis of the shooter's height and weight — have been questioned
by the district attorney in papers previously filed in court. This is the result of a
misleading omission in the offense report. In the only passage in the report that
describes what Ms. Etuk saw, the report says that after the shooting, Ms. Etuk looked
out the front window into the parking lot to see the shooter backing away from Mr.
Lambert. On that occasion, Ms. Etuk told the police “she could not see his face due to
the glass of the windows and dark parking lot...” Appendix 3, at page 11. The report
does not mention that Ms. Etuk also saw the shooter on another occasion, prior to the
shooting up near the front of the store. Her description of this is only in her 1993
2 2
affidavit taken by Mr. Graham’s counsel. On the night of the shooting, Ms. Etuk had
become frustrated with the slowness of payment by a customer and looked out the
window at the front of the store, just a few feet away, and
saw a black man dressed really sharply standing by one of
the concrete columns outside at the front of the store. He
was right up against the window, and appeared to be
leaning slightly. | looked at him for quite a while, more than
a few seconds. He was looking back in my direction and so
| saw him clearly.
Appendix 8, 7 4.
Confirmation of the truth of this statement in Ms. Etuk’s affidavit — even though
this description of seeing the shooter is not in the offense report — comes in two ways.
First, the offense report notes that Ms. Etuk was shown a photo array of possible
suspects. She excluded everyone in the array but told the police the following:
[T]he suspect's face facial features resembled #207610 but
... the suspect was much more neat looking than in the
photo....
Appendix 3, at page 26. Had she only seen the shooter after the shooting — when she
“could not see [the shooter's] face due to the glass of the windows and the dark parking
lot,” Appendix 3, at page 11 — as that portion of the offense report misleadingly
suggested, Ms. Etuk would not have told the police when she was shown a photo array
that “the suspect’s facial features resembled” one of the persons depicted in the photo
array. She had to have seen the shooter's face as she reports in her affidavit, up close
to the store before the shooting, in order to make this observation about the person
i depicted in the photo array. Second, the police report confirms that the shooter was
) )
standing in the area where Ms. Etuk saw him just before the shooting. When Ronald
Hubbard first saw the man who would later shoot Mr. Lambert, “This man was standing
by a concrete column near the NE corner of the front of the store.” Appendix 3, at page
17. This is exactly where Ms. Etuk declared in her 1993 affidavit, Appendix 8, that she
first saw the shooter and observed not only his height and weight but also his facial
features. Ms. Etuk is plainly telling the truth in her affidavit. Ms. Etuk is a long-time
employee of Harris County Child Protective Services and has no criminal record.
Mr. Hubbard and Ms. Etuk did not know and have never known Mr. Graham.
They are neutral witnesses who willingly gave statements to the police and participated
in the investigation. None was heard by the jury that convicted Mr. Graham, and none
has ever been heard by any judge reviewing Mr. Graham's case in state and federal
habeas corpus proceedings.
As we have noted, only one eyewitness, Bernadine Skillern, positively identified
Mr. Graham. Her identification was, quite simply, the mistaken result of suggestive
identification procedures utilized by the police.
When shown an array of five photos, Ms. Skillern saw only one in which the
person depicted had a short Afro haircut and no mustache or beard — a photo of Gary
Graham. See Appendix 9 (photo array, with Mr. Graham depicted in the fourth photo).
His was the only photo even close to the description of the shooter, with short hair and
no facial hair, and his‘was the only photo that had anything marked out on it. See
Appendix 9. Even then, Ms. Skillern declined to identify Mr. Graham as the shooter.
She said his photo looked like the shooter, but the shooter's face was thinner and his
8
v) »)
complexion was darker, and she was not sure Gary Graham's photo was that of the
shooter. Appendix 3, at page 33. This was a critical observation because Ms. Skillern’s
exclusion of Mr. Graham when she first saw his photo — because the shooter had a
thinner face — was consistent with the composite she helped draw of the shooter,
whose face was strikingly thinner than Mr. Graham’s face. Importantly, the composite
was constructed long before Mr. Graham was ever arrested and became a suspect.
The jury never heard any evidence about Ms. Skillern’s exclusion of Mr. Graham
in the photo array. To the contrary, Ms. Skillern testified — mistakenly — that she did
identify Mr. Graham from the photo array. The offense report shows that she did not.
On the day after she saw this photo array, Ms. Skillern, along with Ronald
Hubbard, viewed a live lineup. The only man in the live lineup whose photograph was
also in the photo array was Mr. Graham. Not surprisingly, she picked him out. Experts
say that the likelihood of a false identification under these circumstances is greatly
increased, because it is likely that she picked out the man familiar to her because of the
photograph she saw the day before, not because she had seen the man commit the
crime. See Appendix 10, ff] 10(a), (b), (c) and (d) (Declaration of Elizabeth Loftus,
Ph.D.). As Dr. Loftus observed, because of the suggestive identification process,
There is no way to determine whether the identification of
Graham was based on the photograph or on Skillern’s
memory of the gunman. However, the risk is substantial that
it was based solely on the photograph.
Appendix 10, 10(d). Ms. Skillern was never cross-examined about these suggestive
line-up procedures in the presence of the jury.
» 2)
The composite drawing that Ms. Skillern constructed eleven days before Mr.
Graham became a suspect — which all the eyewitnesses said was accurate — confirms
that Ms. Skillern’s identification of Mr. Graham was mistaken. Compared to the booking
photograph taken when Mr. Graham was arrested for an unrelated offense one week
after the shooting, the person depicted in the composite is clearly not Mr. Graham. See
Appendix 11 (side-by-side comparison of the composite and the booking photo of Gary
Graham). Two different men are depicted. The man in the composite has a much
thinner face than Mr. Graham, just like Ms. Etuk and Ms. Skillern said. The jury was not
given the opportunity to compare the composite drawing and the booking photo.
2. The forensic evidence
Bobby Lambert was killed by a .22 caliber bullet. Mr. Graham had a .22 caliber
pistol when he was arrested. The jury heard the first of these facts in the guilt phase of
trial and the second in the penalty phase. However, when deciding if Mr. Graham killed
Mr. Lambert, the jury did not hear the undisputed conclusion of the Houston Police
Department's firearms expert: The fatal bullet could NOT have been fired from Mr.
Graham’s pistol. As the offense report explained,
The pistol we submitted [taken from Mr. Graham upon his
arrest] had 8 lands and grooves and the bullet that was
submitted from the complainant’s [Lambert’s] body had only
six lands and grooves. Therefor[e] he [the firearms
examiner] said it couldn’t be the weapon.
Id. See also Appendix 12 (report from firearms examiner).
Thus, there was no forensic evidence that linked Mr. Graham to the crime.
10
“ >)
3. Motive evidence
There was no motive for Mr. Graham to kill Mr. Lambert. They did not know
each other. The state claimed it was a robbery gone bad. But — Lambert had
$6,000.00 in cash still stuck in his back pocket when the police searched his pants.
This was not a robbery. ,
There were people, as yet unknown, who had a motive to kill Mr. Lambert.
Before his murder, Bobby Lambert faced federal drug trafficking charges in Oklahoma
City for his arrest in August, 1980, while “piloting a plane carrying 40,000 qualudes and
several ounces of cocaine” into a small town in Oklahoma. Appendix 3, at page 17.
Continuing investigation has revealed that late in 1980, the drug trafficking charges
were dropped against Mr. Lambert after the suppression of the drugs seized from his
plane due to the seizure of the drugs without a search warrant. Thereafter, the federal
prosecutor forced immunity onto a reluctant Bobby Lambert to force him to testify
before a federal grand jury about the person or persons for whom he was transporting
the drugs. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Lambert was killed. In the wake of his death, a Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent from Oklahoma City called the Houston Police
Department about Mr. Lambert, noting that “he had a grand jury summons for [Lambert]
ona drug related case.” /d. at 16. The attorney representing Mr. Lambert in
connection with the federal — in Oklahoma City recently informed Mr.
Graham's counsel that he and others involved in this case believed that Lambert was
killed by the drug organization for whom he worked to prevent him from testifying before
the grand jury.. Counsel for Mr. Graham are continuing to investigate this matter to
1
determine whether this was the motive for Mr. Lambert’s murder and to try to identify
who committed the murder. These circumstances plainly provided a motive for Mr.
Lambert’s murder that Gary Graham did not have.
B. Why Mr. Graham's Trial Lawyers Mistakenly Thought He Was Guilty
and thus Failed to Investigate and Present the Evidence that He Was
Innocent
Coincidentally, in the ten day period after Bobby Lambert was murdered, Mr.
Graham committed nearly a dozen aggravated robberies. Ultimately, Mr. Graham
entered pleas of guilty to all the charges that were pressed concerning these offenses
and has never challenged the disposition of these cases. These crimes were not in any
way related to the murder of Mr. Lambert and do not in any fair way undermine Mr.
Graham's claim that he is innocent of the murder of Mr. Lambert. Nor do these crimes
serve as some sort of proof that Mr. Graham committed the murder of Mr. Lambert.
Nevertheless, some people have been influenced to think that Mr. Graham is guilty of
the murder of Mr. Lambert because he committed these other crimes within the same
general period of time. This happened to Ron Mock, Mr. Graham's lead trial counsel —
the defense investigator at trial said that this is why no investigation was undertaken
despite Mr. Graham’s assertion of innocence — so it could happen to anyone.
Accordingly, it is essential to appreciate why these other offenses should not be
taken as proving that Mr. Graham was guilty of killing Bobby Lambert. The best way to
appreciate this is to understand why, had these offenses been offered against Mr.
Graham in the guilt phase of his capital murder trial, they would not have been admitted
into evidence.
12
oy >»)
When a person has committed offenses similar to the offense for which he is
being tried, the other offenses can fairly be used to establish that he committed the
charged offense only if some distinct characteristic of the other offenses is shared by
the charged offense. In Mr. Graham’s case, the other offenses committed by Mr.
Graham lacked any "distinguishing characteristic common to ... the tied for which
[he was] on trial," Cobb v. State, 503 S.W.2d 249, 251 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974). The
charged offense and the other offenses had some non-distinguishing similarities: all
were robberies or attempted robberies involving the use of a gun, all took place ina
public place, and all occurred within the same ten day period. However, these
characteristics were no more than "similarities in the commission of the same type of
crime," Ford v. State, 484 S.W.2d 727, 730 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972), that are not enough
to "set[ ] [the extraneous offenses and the charged offense] apart from [their] class or
type of crime in general..." /d. Specifically,
(a) None of the other offenses involved intentionally shooting a victim at point
blank range.
(b) The other offenses as a group shared a set of characteristics that sharply
distinguished them from the incident at the Safeway in which Bobby Lambert was killed.
(i) All the other offenses began with a ruse designed to get the victim
to relax and let his or her guard down. The murder of Mr. Lambert did not.
(ii) All the other offenses involved Mr. Graham's persuading the victim
to let him into his or her vehicle, and it was in the vehicle that the actual robbery took
place. The murder of Mr. Lambert did not involve any such ruse.
13
Ls f >)
(iii) None of the other offenses involved an aggravated assault in a
public place in view of other people. The murder of Mr. Lambert did.
(iv) _ All the other offenses involved the actual taking of money or
vehicles or both. The murder of Mr. Lambert did not.
Because the crimes committed by Mr. Graham were themselves distinct from the
offense in which Mr. Lambert was killed, these crimes could not have been used in
court to show that Mr. Graham murdered Mr. Lambert. Their lack of similarity to the
Lambert killing should prevent them from being used by anyone in or out of court to
conclude that Mr. Graham killed Mr. Lambert.
One other fact is significant about the crimes actually committed by Mr. Graham.
All the robberies that he committed were committed after the murder of Mr. Lambert on
May 13, 1981. If Mr. Graham had killed Bobby Lambert, logic would say that having
killed once, if Mr. Graham were really the killer, at least one of the subsequent
robberies would have resulted in a murder. None did.
Cc. Why the Courts Have Not Ordered a New Trial for Mr. Graham: No
Court Has Been Willing or Able to Hear the Evidence of Innocence
When evidence of innocence has not been presented at trial, the wrongfully
convicted person can attempt to show in state or federal habeas corpus proceedings
that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance in failing to present such evidence.
This did not occur in Mr. Graham's first state and federal habeas corpus proceedings,
however, because the lawyer representing Mr. Graham in those proceedings, which
~ took place between1988 and 1993, also failed to undertake an adequate investigation
14
y >
and thus failed, as trial counsel had, to discover and present the evidence of innocence
contained in the offense report based upon crime scene witnesses’ observations and
the firearms report. Only when:a second round of state and federal habeas corpus
proceedings was brought on behalf of Mr. Graham in 1993 was the evidence of
innocence discovered and presented in papers filed in the state and fevieral courts.
When this evidence was presented in the 1993 state habeas application, the
state courts refused to re-examine their previous conclusions concerning Mr. Graham’s
guilt and denied the application without holding a hearing to evaluate the credibility of
the numerous crime scene witnesses, or any of the other evidence which would have
exonerated Mr. Graham. Ex Parte Graham, 853 S.W.2d 564 (Tex.Crim.App. 1993).
Significantly as well, the state courts refused to stay Mr. Graham's scheduled execution
and continue the state habeas proceeding even though Mr. Graham was first getting
access to the district attorney's trial file on the day the state trial court denied his
habeas application. After the state courts had already ruled against Mr. Graham, his
access to the district attorney's file produced more evidence corroborative of his
innocence — two more crime scene witnesses who would have exonerated him had they
testified at trial, and extensive corroboration of the already-discovered crime scene
witnesses’ observations that exonerated Mr. Graham.
Thereafter, in July, 1993, Mr. Graham filed his second petition for writ of habeas
corpus in the federal district court which included the evidence that Mr. Graham
discovered after the state courts had already ruled against him. Because this was his
second federal habeas petition, federal rules required that Mr. Graham show that his
15
lan “~
{ t i
claims for relief raised a “colorable” claim of innocence — that he was “probably”
innocent — before his claims could be heard. See Kuhlmann v. Wilson, 477 U.S. 436,
444 n.6, 454 (1986); McCleskey v. Zant, 499 U.S. 467, 494 (1991).
Mr. Graham made such a showing — on paper — in his federal habeas petition.
The federal district court agreed that he had but rejected his claim that his lawyer
provided ineffective assistance because of the deference that it believed it had to give
to the state habeas courts’ decision. Graham v. Collins, 829 F.Supp. 204 (S.D.Tex.
1993). Again, like the state courts, the federal district court refused to hold an
evidentiary hearing at which the evidence of Mr. Graham's innocence could have been
fairly considered.
On appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the district
court’s decision was overturned and its deference to the state courts’ decision was set
aside. In its decision in August, 1996, the Fifth Circuit explained that the facts showing
that Mr. Graham was innocent and that his trial lawyers provided ineffective assistance
were not sufficiently resolved for it to decide the merits of Mr. Graham's case —
precisely because there had been no evidentiary hearing concerning these issues:
The issues in this case are almost exclusively factual, and
the relevant factual scenario is complex, highly controverted,
and in many respects unresolved. The district court denied
the petition without an evidentiary hearing. There is a large
body of relevant evidence that has not been presented to
the state court. It is doubtful that the record before us allows
review of the underlying issues on a fully informed basis.
Graham v. Johnson, 94 F.3d 958, 971 (5" Cir. 1996).
Because of its view that “a large body of relevant evidence ... has not been
16
a ry
presented to the state court,” the Fifth Circuit decided that the federal habeas
proceeding should be dismissed to permit the state courts a further opportunity to
resolve the factual questions concerning Mr. Graham's innocence. This further
opportunity was provided the state courts in 1998 when Mr. Graham filed his third state
habeas corpus application. Rather than reconsidering Mr. Graham's claims, however,
the Court of Criminal Appeals simply decided that the application failed to satisfy the
statutory criteria for bringing a subsequent state habeas corpus application and
dismissed the application without any hearing.® Despite the Fifth Circuit’s dismissal of
the federal case so that the state courts could hold the sorely-needed evidentiary
hearing, again no evidentiary hearing was held in which Mr. Graham’s witnesses’
testimony could be heard and evaluated.
Immediately after this decision, Mr. Graham returned to federal court, only to be
met with a new, insurmountable barrier to the consideration of his claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel and innocence. During the three-year period while the appeal of
the denial of the1993 federal habeas petition was pending (1993-1996), Congress
enacted the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). One of
the changes effected by this legislation was to require federal habeas petitioners who
were returning to federal court on a second or subsequent federal habeas estifen to
show not only what they had to show in 1993 — a probability that they were innocent —
6The Court declared only the following without explanation: “We have examined the
application and find it fails to satisfy Art. 11.071, § 5, and accordingly dismiss the
application as an abuse of the writ.” Ex parte Graham, No. 17,568-05 (November 18,
1998),
17
but also to show that the evidence of innocence could not have been discovered in
connection with a previous federal habeas proceeding. The latter requirement
precluded any consideration of Mr. Graham’s claims, for he could not show that the
evidence of innocence could not have been discovered earlier. Indeed his claim was
that trial counsel should have discovered this evidence in connection with trial,
because the prosecutor made the offense report available to them. Because of these
changes in federal habeas corpus law, the federal district court, Graham v. Johnson, 45
F.Supp.2d 555 (S.D.Tex. 1999), and the Fifth Circuit, Graham v. Johnson, 168 F.3d
762 (5" Cir. 1999), held that Mr. Graham's claims could not be considered at all. On
May 1, 2000, the Supreme Court refused to review these decisions. Graham v.
Johnson, __ U.S. ____, 2000 WL 505438. Again, despite the courts’ review of his
case, the evidence of Mr. Graham’s innocence has never been heard.
D. Unless this Board Intervenes, Mr. Graham Will Be Executed for a
Crime He Did Not Commit Without Any Forum Having Conducted a
Eair Inquiry into the Evidence of His Innocence
Despite the lengthy procedural history of his case, Mr. Graham's case is simple
and elemental. The facts presented in the habeas petitions filed in 1993 and again in
1998 raise grave questions about his guilt, clearly enough to support his unwavering
assertion that he is innocent because of mistaken identification. Ina way that few other
cases have, these facts raise the specter of executing an innocent person. Nothing is
clearer or more elemental than that our system of justice cannot permit an innocent
person to be convicted, condemned, and executed. As the Supreme Court recognized
in Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 324-325 (1995), “[t]he quintessential miscarriage of
18
» »
justice is the execution of a person who is entirely innocent.”
Although there is a long history of courts’ reviewing technical procedures
followed in Mr. Graham's case, the courts have still not done what elemental justice
requires in the circumstances presented by his case. Elemental justice requires a full
hearing of the evidence of Mr. Graham's innocence by an repaTUal court to determine
whether Mr. Graham’s lawyer’s failure to discover and present this evidence requires
that he have a new trial. .No court has ever done that.
Mr. Graham’s last reasonable chance to persuade the courts to intervene and
prevent this travesty of justice ended with the United States Supreme Court on May 1,
2000. The only chance Mr. Graham now has of avoiding a wrongful execution is with
the Governor and this Board.
LEGAL ISSUES PRESENTED IN THE COURTS
The legal issues which have been raised during the judicial progress of the case
include the following:
(a) Mr. Graham was denied effective assistance of counsel at trial, in violation
of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, due to counsel's failure to investigate and
present crime scene witnesses, alibi witnesses, and other evidence that would have
shown that the sole evidence connecting Mr. Graham to the crime — a single crime
scene witness who identified Mr. Graham as the perpetrator — was erroneous, and that
Mr. Graham had nothing to do with the crime.
(b) | Mr. Graham was denied due process under the Fourteenth Amendment
because he-was-convicted and sentenced to death for a crime he did not commit.
19
*, -)
STATEMENT OF THE EFFECT OF THE CRIME FOR WHICH MR. GRAHAM
HAS BEEN CONVICTED UPON THE FAMILY OF THE VICTIM
What we know about the victim in this case, Bobby Grant Lambert, is that he was
estranged from his wife at the time of his death. He had at least one child who was an
adult. We know of no special circumstances that made Mr. Lambert’s death any worse
for his survivors than it is for any victim of homicide — which is immensely painful and
which disrupts terribly the mission that each life has.
Of great significance to the decision by the Board and Governor, Mr. Lambert's
widow and daughter wrote the Governor and Board in 1993 asking that Mr. Graham be
granted a conditional pardon or some other form of clemency that would spare his life.
See Appendix 13 (letters from Loretta Lambert and Cindy Rutter).
CONCLUSION
Who should pay the price for the blunder of Mr. Graham’s trial lawyers? Should
Mr. Graham pay with his life for a crime he did not commit?
Responsible citizens, including death penalty advocates, should shudder at the
thought of an execution based solely on a two-second view of a stranger’s face in the
dark — especially when there exists compelling evidence that the identification resulting
from that glimpse was wrong.
ACCORDINGLY, Mr. Graham respectfully requests that the Texas Board of
Pardons and Paroles recommend to the Honorable George W. Bush, Governor of the
State of Texas,
(a)-. that he grant-a reprieve of Mr. Graham's execution, now
20
>) ry
scheduled for June 22, 2000, for 120 days to permit a full
and fair inquiry into the facts of Mr. Graham’s case, and
thereafter,
(b) that he grant a pardon, relieving Mr. Graham from his
wrongful conviction and death sentence. :
In the alternative, Mr. Graham asks the Board to recommend to the Governor,
after the period of reprieve and full inquiry,
(c) that he grant a conditional pardon relieving Mr. Graham of
his conviction and death sentence upon the condition that he
waive double jeopardy protections and submit to a retrial, or
(d) that he grant a commutation of his death sentence.
Mr. Graham further requests that in reviewing Mr. Graham's request for
- clemency, the Board conduct a full and fair hearing into the facts of his innocence.
Respectfully submitted,
AS GosA8 Frmarper~
RICHARD H. BURR KB. ZIMMER MANN
1630 Castle Court, Suite A South P. Rw Lane, Suite 620
Houston, Texas 77002 fon, Texas 77056
(713) 523-2299 (713) 552-0300
(713) 523-3833 (fax) (713) 552-0746 (fax)
Max 31,2000
Counsel for Gary Graham
21
2 9
APPENDICES
1 Indictment, verdicts, sentence, judgment in No. 335378, State of Texas v.
Gary Graham, 182" District Court of Harris County
2 Order setting execution date of June 22, 2000
3 Houston Police Department Offense Report
4 Composite drawing of suspect
5 Affidavit of Ronald Hubbard
6 Height and weight data for Gary Graham
7 Photographs of entire live lineup
8 Affidavit of Sherian Etuk
9 Photo array shown to Bernadine Skillern
10 Declaration of Elizabeth Loftus
11 Side-by-side comparison of composite of suspect and booking photo of
Gary Graham
12 Report of firearms examination by Houston Police Department
13 Letters from Loretta Lambert and Cindy Rutter
INDICTMENT
CAUSE NO.: 335378"
FILED: JUNE 9, 1982 _ 7
ie: STATE OF TEXAS REV. 5/80
Kenneth Stokes
aka Gary Graham SPI -81 AG 123
aka Gary Graham WIo=sses——«—«éATE Prep ED: BY: .
unknown Dor AGENCY: in 0-19 —0/R noe eeebee
NY CHARGE: neck CODE: ARREST DATE:
Capital Murder a ne TED CASES:
= NO: 335378 x, 2D
1S COUNTY DISTRICT COURT NO.: 182nd D.C aki, s__NO BOND vs Rc ow Sh
PRIOR CAUSE NO:
“HE NAME AND BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
duly organized Grand Jury of Harris County, Texas, presents in the District Court of Harris County, Texas, that in Harris County, Texas,
KENNETH STOKES AKA GARY GRAHAM
iter styled the Defendant, heretofore on or about May 13, 1981 ies
and there unlawtully :
while in the course of committing and attempting to commit the robbery of
BOBBY GRANT LAMBERT, hereafter styled the Complainant, intentionally
cause the death of the Complainant by shooting the Complainant with a
gun.
It is further presented that in Harris County, Texas, KENNETH STOKES, aka
GARY GRAHAM, hereafter styled the Defendant, heretofore on or about MAY 13, 1981,
did then and there unlawfully intentionally and knowingly cause the death
of BOBBY GRANT LAMBERT, hereafter styled the Complainant, by shooting the
Complainant with a gun.
It is further presented that in Harris County, Texas, KENNETH STOKES, aka
GARY GRAHAM, hereafter styled the Defendant, heretofore on or about MAY 13,
1981, did then and there unlawfully intend to cause serious bodily injury to
ROBBY GRANT LAMBERT, hereafter styled the Complainant, and did cause the death
of the Complainant by committing an act clearly dangerous to human life, namely,
by shooting the Complainant with a gun.
It is further presented that in Harris County, Texas, KENNETH STOKES, aka
GARY GRAHAM, hereafter styled the Defendant, heretofore on or about MAY 13,
1981, did then and there unlawfully, while in the course of committing theft
of property owned by BOBBY GRANT LAMBERT, hereafter styled the Complainant, and
with intent toe obtain and maintain control of the property, intentionally and
| knowingly threaten and place the Complainant in fear of imminent bodily injury and
| death, by using and exhibiting a deadly weapon, namely, a firearm.
| AINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE.
. HowA eb ae
FOREMAN OF THE GRAND JURY
*
a —
ee
1 TR
ngat/190 MINUTES OF THE 7 °224 DISTRICT COURT OF mJ COUNTY, TEXAS,
AT THE hagas Ue Term, A, 0. 1972
JUDGMENT
no. 235372
THE STATE OF TEXAS
7 pote _Octoher 26 921
“eaneth Stover ava Gary Grahe> on motinn of the Deferdant the Court
ardered rane charced to Gary Graham
Attorney for Stote Asst, Dist, Atty. Carl Eohhe
Attorney for Defendont ; Ren Moc’ and Checter Thornton
CAPITAL . IRDER acer Mirder end Aseravated Rohhery ac
wink fhe indictment pat span antior
“the Tetantarepn etal FOr CABTTAL MURDER
Dote of Offense May Ut A. 0,19 21
Pleo
Count and/or
Porogreph F count ore ' oaragraoh one CAPTAL MURDER
Pleo to Enhoncement
Findings on Enhoncement n'a
Punishment, z Death
The Defendont having been indicted in the obove entitled ond numbered couse for the felony
offense indicoted above ond this couse being this day called for tricl, the Stote oppeared by her
District Attorney es named cbove and the Defendont named obove oppeared in person with Counsel as
romed obove, and both parties onnounced ready for trial.
i)
N“
aS A Jury conposed of Ben D. Bradley ond eleven others wos selected,
impanelled, ond sworn, The Indictnent was reod to the Jury ond the Defendont, entered o ples of
Y not guilty thereto, ofter having heard the evidence submitted; ond hoving been chorged by the
Court as to their duty to determine the guilt or innocence of the Defendant end the argument of
counsel, the Jury retired in charge of the proper officer ond returned into open court on the
—28th_ doy of October » 19_81 __, the following verdict,
N Walch wos received by the Court and is here entered of record upod the minutes:
"we the Jury . find the defendant , GARY GRAHAM. " Giiilty™
% of the n*fenre of canitel winder, ac charged in the indictment.
¥ ‘a! Ben D_ Bradley
far, . FOREMAN OR FORELADY OF TPE JURY"
if fe
| ‘
Thereupon, the jury, in occordence with low, heard further evidence, and hoving been ogoin
chorged by the Court, the jury retized in charge of the proper officer ond returned into open
f Court on the doy of 0/ a the following verdict,
| which wos rectived if se ond i hare entered of feccrd upon the wlnutess
CAUSE NO, 335378
| TRE STATE OF TEXAS IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
vs. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
GARY. GRAHAM E 182nd JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Do you fidn from the evidence » Beyor easonable doubt that the con-
duct of the Defendant that caused the death of the deceased was cownitted
deliberately and with the reasonable expectation that the death of the
deceased or another would result?
In your verdict you will answer "Yes" or "No" as you find the fact to
ANSWER
% CAUSE NO . 335378 >) ;
THE STATE OF TEXAS IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
vs. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
GARY GRAHAM YY 182nd JJDICIAL DISTRICT
SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 2
Do you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable. doubt thet there in -
a probability the Defendant would commit criminal actis of violence that
would constitute a continuing threat to society?
In your verdict you will answer "Yes" or " No" as you find the fact to
he..
ANSWER: Yes
THE STATE OF TEXAS
vs.
GARY GRAHAM
RRIS ‘COUNTY , TEXAS
id. JUDICIAL DISTRICT
B NO: 3" ee
Do you find from the evidence teydad: at tpeasénable: doubt whether the
conduct of the Defendant in killing the deceased was unreasonable in
response to the provocation, if any, by the deceased.
In your verdict you will answer "Yes" or "No" as you find the fact
to be
ANSWER: _Yes
‘s’ Ben D Bradley _
FOREMAN OF THE JURY "
> >
It is therefore considered, ordered, ond adjudged by the Court thot the Defendant is
guilty of the offense indicated obove, a felony, as found by the verdict of the jury, ond that
the said Defendant commited the said offense on the date indicated above, and that he be
punished, os hes been determined by the Jury, by death, and that Defendant be remanded to Jol to
owait further orders of this court.
And thereupon, the said Defendant wos;asked the Court whether he had anything to soy
why sentence should not be pr founced gins nese he onswered nothing in bor thereof.
Whereupon the Court prpteed sé
him as follows, to wit, "rts ‘the: order tof the: plate “that the Defendant named above, who has
been adjudged to be guilty of. ‘the ‘ense indicated jaboye and whose punishment has been assessed
by the verdict of the jury i¢nd the igment | of. the: Court. at Death, shall be delivered by the
Sheriff of Harris County, Texés! imnedictdly! ite the Direttor of Corrections of the State of Texas,
or ony other person legally! ibuch convicts, and said Defendant shall be
confined in said Department o cord. ance” “with the provisions of the law governing
ihe Texas Department of Cor: of: execution of the said Defendont is imposed by
this Court after receipt in ine ‘Court of mondate of affirmance by the Court of Criminal Appeals
of the Stote of Texas.
The said Defendont is remanded to jail until said Sheriff con obey the directions of this
sentence, From which Sentence on appeal is token as a motter of low to the Court of Criminal
Appeals of the State of Texas, Aistin, Texos.
Signed ond entered on this the 30 doy of f ex ‘ob tr 19 £L .
<9
hae ni eT
& Judge Lxeeeristzict Court
Horris"County, Texas
COPY TO we // 2 4
HHH EK RNIN KREIS, SH HK IE EK KE EY SERER AREA RE RURKE
. TON POLICE DEPARTMENT _)
CFFENSE REPORT - - Oe CIBENT © RO.
RY Jc IDO OOO OIE OER
OFFENSE> CAPITAL MURDER ~*~ ° .
PREMISES ~ GROCERY STORE. ‘paRKINS LOT WEATHER- OVERCAST ~
LOCATION: STREET NO- 888935 “NANE=-NORTH -> . ~
\ TYPE- FWY 9 SUFFIX- 9 @PT NO- 7 ee: - ox ®
DIST--6. 5°. BEAT- 6878 :- = >°
BEGIN BATE- WE 5. 43/84 TIME- 2435 END DATE- 3
RECEIVED/ERPLOYEE? NANE-J; GAELLIS * NO. "B91g08 paTE-2s/ 4472
-COMPLAINANTES) <=
NO-4'NOME: LAST-LAMBERT-“ - FIRST-BOBBY © - MIDDLELGRANT
RADE SEX-f AGE-S3 HISPANIC~ . - ;
> -ADDRESS-UNKNOUR os . ae a
“ TNQURED: TAKEN TO-BEN TAUB MORGUE - © , -SY-CHAUVIN ERVINGTOR FUNERAL ->
CONDITION-DSA. Bg ee } :
eines a a re oe ee ee
- WITNESSES] ~~ a
NO-64 et a ‘_FIRST-BERNADINE MIDDLE-< - ; Te Teg,
: X-F AGE-33 HISPANIC- ‘ :
2282 ° DRAYTON ! ye of
HORE-(OBB) 445-4569 BUSINESS-CeUB). 694-2812 EXT- mgs 8 8
NO-Sz Navies s eft-oneny » erasT-pabted’-
eA mi 48E-35 HISPANIC- : .
? BERG an
T-AMGS IRST-WILMA MIDDLE- |
F AGE- HISPANTC— : ; “
@ WHITE CASTLE LN :
- ceaes 999-8354 BUSINESS-(@G@) @G-5G82 EXT-
iH. ne a corto tote em es too eine is
ee ie
NO-83
* RepoRTEECs *
NAHE: LAST-GONZALEZ ETRST-NANCY: --MIDDL
RAGE-H SEX-F AGE=43 HISPANIC- —_
ORESS-5623 GALE - ;
PHONES HONE-CO22) 694-G294 BUSINESS-Caga? 449-4825, EXT- ; ;
REX: sea RSET RIO A NRA KEK iabajudauhehebelatclahecaialataial stated RERERRRERRRKER RRR RT AR AA:
INCIDENT NO. @25287684 (OFFENSE REPORT- “ PAGE ¢.G@2
peeenerneren srr rrrr eer rt NFER RTR Seer ee
VEHICLES} Pan Be
/yo-G4 TYPE-GENERAE COMPLAINANT NO- -b 4 DISPASITION-TOED
“YR-745 HAKE-DODGE = “+ -STYLE-gus.
LICENSE: NO-ANB394 = STATE-AR YEAR=82 MONTH-@@ TYPE=
VIN-B35BE4X@354183 - : COLORS: JSTCURITE =o ND a og
RECOVERY sLGCATION— 8935 NORTH FUY - DIST“ © “BE ATHB Se
BATE-@5/ 13/84 TINE-2435 VALUE-$ -
WRECKER-HUBBARD |. - UNIT: NO-36° .
LOCATION STORED-2222 STUDEUGODS -
“8. 9a -
PHO Y=-C G2) 864 3478
.7 01 3 DETAILS OF OFFENSE ~:~
—_ 7
THE CORPLAINANT WAS SHOT ANG KILLED DURING A ROBBERY ATTE
HIS, VEHICLE IN SAFEWAY STORE PARKING LOT AT 8935 NGRTH FA\
OFFICER4: NARE-J.U -ELLIS EMPLOYEE NO-a2 1802 SHIFT ~
OFFICER2: Aa EW. We OWEN ; EMPLOYEE NG-842332 SHIFT— 3: ec
DIVISION/STATION R-HOMICIDE’ UNIT 8-2887_ a . : ay gs 4
CALL RECEIVED: DATE-@8/43/84 7 TRE-Z45 & REPORT. MADE s.
}
—D-A-SHGGTING CALL AT-THE LOCATION. AT-9:4BPM AND ARRIVED AT THE 5:
ERRRARREA RAREST CCE Rn ee
INCIDENT NO. 925207884 OFFENSE REPORT . PAGE 2.029
HEKEL KKK KKKE KE REE RK EKER FER TIER IRIE III, el aia i eed
FHKE A KEENE IKE IH A
_SUSPECT¢S>~~~ oo
NO-@4 DISPOSITION-UNKNGWA=. 0/ - “ HPD-NO-aegeea:
RACE-B SEX-M AGE-48-2S HISPANIC-N DATE OF ‘BIRTH 7 /
HETGHT -548 70-666 ‘WEIGHT-445 TO-456 7
HAIR: COLOR-BLACK _. TYPE-AFRO + LENGTH-SHORT =- na
< COFPLEXIQN-DARK - FACIAL HAIR=- - NGNE*. + ++
DRESS-WHITE BLAZER JACKET AND . BLACK SLSe KS %
‘ WEAPON USED-UNK REVOLVER
i Aiea
SUSPECT FOLLOWED THE. COMPLAINANT FROM GROCERY. STORE. AND ROBBED AND SHOT COP ..-
IN ‘THE PARKING LOT. “\ - ;
RELATED CASES- .
Lake o a “ egageagaa .~--:
REPORT ENTERED BY-3.W.ELLIS - "EMPLOYEE - NunBeR-aa eee" uk te :
STATUS: OFEN-X CLEARED- © INACTIVE-- UNF OUNDED—~ poner
REPORT REVIEWED’ BY-
NARRATIVE ays esatioe
NOTE TO STAFF REVIEW. THIS CASE 33 CONFIDERTIAL .PLEASE cor:
noe
< : . 8 2 oF
ARARAAAARAKAAAA AKA RAAAAAARASAA AAAAATNTR ODUCT] NASA AAA AARAR PAA RAZ ARAAZAAAR AKA AS
WE, DETECTIVES J.W. ELLIS ano WaW QUEN, WHILE IN THE HOMICIDE OFFICE RE
INSTRUCTIONS FROM LT MASON, TO RAKE THE SHOOTING DOA AT THE SAF!
AT 896% NORTH FREEWAY WE RECEIVED THE ASSIGNRENT AT 9:S9Ph
SCERE aT 4G: 2GP iH. .
WE FOUND THE CORRECT LOCATION FOR THE SCENE To BE THE SAFEWAY - STO!
LGT AT 8935 NGORTH-FREEWAY.WE NOTED THAT THE COMPLAINANT WAS LAYS
THE DOOR WAY GF THE STGRE BETWEEN’ THE AUTOMATIC DOOR ANG CASH RES
WAS A TRAIL OF BLOOD FROM THE PARKING LOT 70 THE COMPLAINANT.
THE COMPLAINANT APPEARED: TO HAVE BEEN SHOT ONE TIME IN THE CHEST BY UNK-
WEAPON. FROM THE WOUND IT APPEARED TO BE A ‘SMALL CALIBER WEAPON USES IN THE
“OFFENSE. ; - ;
ON ARRIVAL AT THE SCENE WE WERE MET BY THE -FERST- UNTFORMED-UNIT- iE
UNIT 6884, OFFICER D.G.KALICH CBADGE 84634,PR %-374582 HE TOLD US
\
PT OENT NO. oeezeraet CO) NRX KKK KR KKK HAE KEK KER ERA LER ERE ER RIE RIT CARTAN Rn
INCIDENT NO. 625287884 SD | OFFENSE REPORT ee PASE 2.884
Soar ataete tr ereaeita RHEE KR IKE KK IER EEK HK KK KERR KR KERHKKKERE
HE SAID HE ARRIVED AT THE SANE TIME AS HFD AMBULANCE ‘UNIT &4147 WITH P.A-LOZANG
AND C.A-MICHAELS HHO ATTENDED. THE VICTIM: AND- PRONOUNCED HIM DGA. o
WHEN GFFICER KALICH ARRIVED HE WAS ADVISED BY WITNESSES THAT THE SUSPECT HAD ALE
D THE ‘SCENE TAKING THE WEAPON USED IN THE OFFENSES ~~ :
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRARAAARARAAAAADASAASCENE - SURHARY Seamer menereneneonemaeiponaie
et 1
THE SCENE GF THIS OFFENSE IS THE SAFEWAY GROCERY STORE. AND ‘PARKING LOT AT 3595
NORTH FREEWAY. “THE STORE IS ON. THE WEST SIDE OF THE NORTH FREEWAY ON THE SW
CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF THE SERVICE ROAD AND GULF BANK.ON THE Nu CORNER oR
THE INTERSECTION IS A- TRAVEL LODGE MOTEL WITH A SMALL: STRIP “SHOPPING ce % 4
4 U-TOT-ER STGRE WEST OF THE TRAVEL LODGE.A SHELL SELF. SERVICE 6 GASSLI
IS NORTH OF THE TRAVEL. LODGE.WEST OF THE SAFEWAY STGRE CB TORE Y: ARE
RESIDENCES WHICH ARE SEPARATED FROM THE STORE BY A 6’ WO Ce.SCUTH GF AND:
NEXT TG THE SAFEWAY STORE IS AN UNCGPPLETED STRIP SHOPPING CENTER.IN THE PARKING
LOT OF THE ‘SAFEWAY STORE IS A FOTO ABT, STORE: WHICH WAS GLOSE ON SUR ARRIVAL. 4
sp Wien v0
THE ONL Y REAL EVIDENCE RECOVERED FROM THE SCENE IS A BROWN SAFEWAY BRAND GROCERY
SACK IN WHICH-THE COMPLAINANT CARRIED HIS PURCHASES FROM THE STORE.THES. SACK-,-=
ALONG WITH CONTENTS WERE BROUGHT INTO THE STORE PRIOR TO OUR AR AL BY UNE?
CITIZEN.THE CONTENTS GF THE SACK APPEARED TO BE IN THE » AS SACKED ,
THE ConPLAINANT MADE HIS PURCHASES AND WAS A FOLLOWS:
RALEIGH CIGARRETS-$6.29, BREAD-$4.05, LUNCH MEAT-$4.25,
AT AN UNKNOWN PRICE, oepene E BAGS-$4.45, RILK-$.79,
$4.49, RITZ CRACKERS-$4.35, LUNCH HEAT-$.34,-AND A SIX Fae
THIS SACK WAS RECOVERED BY WILSON AND SUBMITTED TO THE P
SUSPECT MAY HAVE GRABBED THE BAG DURING HIS STRUGGLE wrt
2-ONZENS :
LUNCH MEAT—
OFFICER SSF. WILSON »CSU OFFICER ALSG PHOTOS RAPHED THE SCENE “AND SUPPLEMENTED THE
CASE.
THE COMPLAINANT WAS ceeeragren Maade usa Wea DRIVERS: LICENSE
WAS FOUND IN TRE GLOVE COMPARTMENT OF HIS VERICLE IN THE STORE .
THERE WAS A TRAIL OF “BLOOD LEADING FROM THE FIRST MARKED PARK
BODY WHICH WAS JUST INSIDE THE FRONT DOOR OF .THE STORE FOR A
APFROXIRATELY 25’.THE COMPLAINANT WAS LAYING GN HIG BACK UI
ND HEADS TO THE WEST.THE LEFT LEG WAS CROSSED OVER.THE RIGHT
ER.FEET WEERE TOUCHING THE INSIDE DOOR FRAME ON THE NORTH SIDE.THE ©
WERE EXTENDED GGUTWARD “FROM EACK SIDE OF THE BODY.THE LOWER PORTION 2
TGRSS WAS LAYING GN A RUBERIZED PRESURE PAD FOR THE-AUTONATIC OOGR. =: .
THE COMP WAS. WEARING A WHITE TERRY CLOTH PULL OVER SHIRT WITH HOR:
BLUE STRIPES» KHAKI PANTS BLACK SOCKS WHITE JOGGING E BHGES WiTa BL
DESIGNS AND WHITE PRINT BOXER SHORTS. -
~ THE GNLY APPARENT WOUND TO: THE BGDY WAS 4 SMALL CALIBER Peri
| CHEST WHICH WAS 4 4/2" DOWN FROM THE STERNAL NOTCH AND 2 4
| E RIDLINE. . .
—THERE-WERE NO SIGNS OF STRUGGLE-OR DISORDER AT THE SCENE:: * : .
eee ai ee cee SA: FIER IRIE + mea ee
INCIDENT NO. 825287084 ‘OFFENSE REPORT > | . PASE 2.8
Sela dk! e dileliiaiaiana RI IIR I IRS, shecboosnememncens
WEATHER, WAS... OVERCAST “VISIBILITY WAS FAIR IN. THE PARKING: Lor: WITH TWO MERCURY,
YAPOR TYPE “LIGHTING FIXTURES “IN THE: LOT. > . ee .
ARRAAAKAAAAKAKARRAARKAKARLARARDAAKEACOR NER AAA ARAAAAARAAAAARAARARARARAARARARAA AE
REI 9.C. THOMASON MADE THE SCENE PRON THE MORGUE, AND NADE AN INVENTORY OF THE
cones PERSORAL EFFECTS. -
IN THE ‘CORPS RIGHT FRONT PANTS POCKET WAS ONE BLUE CRICKET DISPOSABLE "LIGHTER, =
& BOOK OF MATCHES FROM BEST WESTERN MOTEL,A KEY WITH 8298 STAMP ED ON IT AND’:
$2.67 IN COIN. IT SHSULD BE NOTED THAT ‘SOME OF HE COINS WERE GN THE FLOGR U
THE COMPS POCKET. ° . . .
IN THE CORPS LEFT FRONT PANTS POCKET" WERE TWO SHORT PENCILS WITHSU UT ERASERS, AND
ONE NICKEL.
IN. THE CORPS LEFT REAR PANTS Pock RET WERE SIXTY fon $448 GE BILLS wHIgH NERE- a
FOLDED IN HALF. AND ORE BLACK BLASTIC cure.
THERE WAS NOG RIGHT REAR PANTS ROCKET AND NO SHIRT POCKETS. -
THE CGH?’ WAS WEARING A DUFONTE BR RAND GOLD WATCH WRIST WATCH WITH BROWN BAND ON
IS LEFT WRIST. — .
N IRVINGTON FUNERAL
WAS PICKED UP FROM THE SCENE BY UN IT Rdgs FOR cHat R
HOHE INC. ‘7282 IRVINGTON BLVD PH & 697-2648. ATTENDANTS WERE 38 ‘DOHERTY AND --,
NORFAN GUILLOT.
THE COHFS MORGUE NUMBER WILL BE 84-2833.AN AUTOPSY REQUE FOR HEAD HAIR,
FINGER AND PALM PRINTS, FOREIGN RATERIAL ON BODY ,CLOTHING, FIY AIL SCRAPINGS: -
BLGOD SAHPLE AND CLOSE UF PHOTOS GF THE WOUNDS J WAS GIVEN TO THOMASON “2Y BLLIS«
& COPY GF THE REGUEST FORA WAS RETAINED @ND WILL SUPPLEMENT THIS REPORT.
os »
.I, OFFICER S.P. WILSON, RIDING UNIT CSU-F, WHILE AT “STATION 5, RECEIVED AN
“WITNESS TO-THE SHOOTING BY THE NAME GF-DANIEL J. GRADY AND TRIEO TG ‘FIND -O
‘I LGADED THE
Onn ap. urcraemea il op OEFENGE REPORT a Wielabebeiahdd sbebsiadleieiel Giksiel:tabacigt]
INCIDENT. NO. G25287484 OFFENSE REPORT - PAGE
is clealaldlelal iaidlalaiaiciaiaivialaidi HEKKENER ES RKRK ER
ee eee ETON anal
- SUPPLEMENTES? omg
NO-G82 4 ;
| OFFENSE- CaP ITAL MURDER
: STREET LocaTran : INFORMATION.
NURBER-- 98% NANE-NORTH , . : TYPE-FuY
DATE OF SFFENBED @S/ 43/84 : - + DATE OF- SUPPLEMENT-2S.
- ‘RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION
HONE
OFFICER‘-S. P. WILSON © 7 ENP h-@s2687- SHIFT-o DIV/STATION-< S.
_ SUPPLEWENT NARRATIVE: os
OCATION. -<
SCENE WAS. -
QUT THE
ASSIGNNENT FROM -LT. ZGCH TO MAKE THE SHOGTING DOA AT THE ABOVE L
THE ASSIGNHENT WAS RECEIVED AT 9:S7PhM AND THE ARRIVAL TInE. CN q
(ar27P iin ONCE ON THE SCENE I TALKED WITH DETECTIVE. ELLUTS AND
DETAILS GF THE OFFENSE. THE SCENE WHERE THE ACTUAL “SHOOTING 10
OUTSIDE THE SAFEWAY STORE IN THE: PARKING LOT. - THE SHOGCTING Tod)
THE FRONT GF @ VEHICLE THAT WAS PARKED IN THE PARKING LOT. I Ti
IF THE SUSPECT TOUCHED THE VEHICLE ANY TIRE DURING OR AFTER THE MOeeES Ts
GRADY STATED THAT THE SUSPECT NEVER TOUCHED THE VEHICLE AND DESI THE:
SUSPECT AND THE C@mPL. AS BEING 3-4 FEET FROM THE VEHICLE AT at -
THE AREA AROUND THE VEHICLE WAS SEARCHED FOR. ANY SPENT HULLS AND NG
FOUND. THE VEHICLE, LIC.RLDH694, WAS COVERED WITH DUST AND DIRT AND
HAO BEEN DISTURGED’ EXCEPT IN A SHALL AREA THAT WAS COVERED IN BLOGS
CORPL. FELL AGAINST THE HOOD OF THE VEHICLE APPARENTLY AFTER BETRG SHOT
RAPID OMEGA CARERA WITH. CG42@ COLOR FILM AND TOOK THE BELOW ~~ s
be TED SCENE PHOTOS: THE NIKON CAMERA FROM THE HOMICIDE OFFICE HAS ALSG be”
—D TC TAKE AN ADDITIGNAL 43 PHOTOS. THE FILM REMAINED IN MY POSSESSION - =
UNTEL IT WAS PAGEER Ik THE PHOTO LOCK BOX IN THE. ID DIVISTON. : :
4 BAS OF GROCERIES THAT THE CONP.L. PURCHASED In THE STORE HAD BEEN TAKEN INTC. -
THE STORE BY A WITNESS GR CONCERNED CITIZEN. -THE NERCHA! SE GAD TAK a
THE GROCERY © SACK INSIDE THE-STORE. AN INVENTORY WAS MADE BY DETECTIVES AND -
IT Took JERAL PHOTOGRAPHS GF THE MERCHANDISE. “I RECOVERED THE GROCERY 3AS
AT 44:35PH AND PLACED IT IN-A PLASTIC BAG. THE GROCERY BAG WILL BE ‘TAGGED +=
Ik THE LATENT PRINT LAB FOR PRINTING. THERE WAS NO RECEIPT INSIDE THE BAG.
SCENE PHOTOS: TAGGED. IN THE PHOTO LOCK BOX IN THE ID DIVISION - --.°
ROLL 4 4 . * ;
4.WEST INF. VIEW-OF THE FRONT OF THE STORE- SHOWING SAFEWAY. SIGN aie
2.WEST SFT. VIEW GF THE. BODY INSIDE THE “STORE | BY THE FRONT DOGR
3.NGRTH 3@FT. VIEW GF THE BODY-COVERED a
4.NORTH 38FT. VIEW OF THE BODY-COVERED ~---- ~~ °
S.SOUTH 42FT. VIEW OF THE BODY SHOWING THE PostTz0N" IN REEOUE ON TO THE
i FRONT DOGR™
6 DOWN SFT. VIEW OF THE FACE: QF THE COMPL.~
7.S.E. VIEW OF ‘THE BOOY o-
8.S.E. VIEW OF THE BODY
9 NE VIEW GF THE BODY
AG.SGUTH 7FT. VIEW OF THE BODY _ _
eer ant, paconeapa <& F HHH KKK KEK KKK KAHN NAN ELMER RRERA LEER RENEE An 8
INCIDENT NG. G252678B4 © OY. OFFENSE REPORT > PASE 2.007
Csaiciaiebesaleieleieieieiocommieieieidenia sleleeboel ieisiteiciieteedetateia JHE KES:
ROLL H2 _ 4 :
4WEST S8FT. VIEW OF THE SHOOTING SCENE AND- THE VEHICLE ae ae
2.WEST 2857... VIEW OF THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE WHERE TRE SHEOTING ae se
TOOK PLACE”
3.N.U. 8FT. VIEW GF THE GROCERY BAG BELONGINS Te THE COMPL. -
4.N.W. 45FT. VIEW OF THE FRONT ‘OF THE VEHICLE WHERE THE SHOOTENS mS
: . . TOOK PLACE SHOWING LIC.#LDHS94 -
-S.WEST . 7FT. VIEW OF THE BLOOD ON THE HOGD -:
- 6.N.U. 7FT.. VIEW OF THE BLOOD.ON THE PAVEMENT IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE se
7.WEST . 2@FT. VIEW OF THE BLOOD ON THE- PAVEMENT | LEADING Anta THE - STGRE
@.WEST S@FT. VIEW OF THE FRONT DF THE-STORE - ¥ .
9 WEST SFT. VIEW OF THE’ BLOOD ON THE HOOD OF -THE: VEHICLE
4@-WEST {3FT. VIEW OF THE BLOOD TRAIL LEADING INTO THE STORE -: ~.--
ROLL 83-43 PHOTOS ON ce 43s COLOR FILA-NGT DOCUMENTED | sel - .
a
EVIDENCE: TAGGED IN THE LATENT PRINT. LAB ; Ls
4.PLASTIC BAG CONTAINING ONE BROWN GROCERY SACK SAFEWAY BRAND 2 =
NO-8932 "be an a =
GFFENSE- CAPITAL RURDER
. STREET LOCATION INFORMATION
NUNBER- . 9@6G NARE-NORTH - TYPE-FUY SUF FIX-
OATE GF GFFENSE-@5/43/84 - a: DATE OF- SUPPLERENT-@5/ 44/94 if
CORFLCS3 LAST-LASBERT FIRST-BOaBY MIDDLE-SRANT . .
. RECONERED TOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION s
NONE .
OFT ICER 4-1 wd OWER a ‘EMPH-842392 SHIFT-2_ pIv/STarION-Hor sLCIDE +
GFFICER2Z-J.W-ELLIS . . ERPS-834863 SHIFT- Boos
SUEPLEHENT NARRATIVE «>. -
HOSPITAL INVESTIGATION. ~
HOUSTON FIRE DEPARTMENT ANBULANCE UNIT 44677 MANNED BY PARAMEDIC P.AeLOZANG AND
CHAUFFEUR C.A-RICHAELS -WAS DISPATCHED TG THE SCENE .OF A SHOOTING AT THE SAFEWAY
STORE AT 8966 NGRTH FREEWAY-AT. 9:4@PRi. HFD AMBULANCE UNIT 4467 ARRIVED ON THE:
| SCENE AT 9:44PR FINDING THE COMPLAINANT INSIDE THE STORE WITH A GUNSHOT WOUND TI
| THE CHEST. THE CORPLAINANT WAS PRONOUNCED AT ‘9:45PM BY PARAMEDIC LOZANO.
IN EXAMINING THE COMPLAINANTS WOUND AT.THE MORGUE WE FOUND THAT IT APPEARED TC -
BE A SINGLE GUNSHOT WOUND TO THE “UPPER CHEST WITH NO EXIT. THE WGUND WAS 4 AND
4/2 INCHES DOWN FROM THE STERNAL NOTCH AND 2 AND 4/2 INCHES TG THE RIGHT OF THE
(MEDLINE | ; ves : “8 : ;
THE CORPLAENANT WAS CLOTHED IN A BLUE AND WHITE MULTI COLORED HNI
1
|
|
i
“ING AND FELL AGAINST THE VEHICLE BELONGING TG- THE #2 WITh
INCIDENT NO. 825207834 OFFENSE REPORT >. "PAGE 2.68
KEK KIRKE RE ERE RHE HR RKEE HIER IERIE EEE HKE KKK K EHH HE KEKE RE ERE
SPORT SHIRT, KHAKI SLACKS, BLACK SOCKS, WHITE TENNIS SHOES, AND WHZTE BRIEFS. -. -
WITH A RED AND BLUE-PATTERN ON THER. THESE CLOTHING ITEMS REMAINED WITH THE ~
godY OF THE COMPLAINANT, ALTHOUSH IT WILL BE NECESSARY TO RECOVER THE SHERT-
@aNC SUBMIT IT TO THE CRIME LAB “FOR DISTANCE DETERMINATION. i
re ee Ty tebe ) EPEC SC SE EAE IEE ER FN RT HSIEH
*
DETAILS oF OFFENSE:
THE DETAILS OF THIS OFFENSE ARE “AS FOLLOWS: THE COMPLAINANT) BOBBY GRANT LAN=~ 4
BERT, RECENTLY ARRIVED IN THE CITY FROM TUCSON ARIZONA.” THE PURPOSE OF: THE COP FF
LAINANTS TRIP TO HOUSTON -IS UNKi KNOWN. THE ‘COMPLAINANT HAD BEEN STAYING AT THE 34
BEST-WESTERN MOTEL, GREENSPOINT GN THE NORTH FREEWAY BUT ACCORDINS TG THE! DESK
CLERK» AL SHARIFF, PHONE BALTES SES HE HAD CHECKED GUT ON NAY & AT 9: GSPH.~
SHORTEY ‘BEFORE: “Fs BORK: TONIGHT. THE: ACOMPLAINANT “ENTERED “-THE® SAFEWAY. TORE
8935 NORTH FREEWAY. AFTER COMPLETING A ‘BRIEF SHOPPING SPREE IN WHI cH HE
CHASED ASSORTED FOOD ITEMS. THE COMPLAINANT CHECKED OUT WITH CASHIER ‘MESCHELL .
GILLIAN AT REGISTER 2 PAYING'FOR HIS FOOD ITEMS WITH A $4@8.G8 BILL: CASHIE oe
GILLIAN WAS UNCERTAIN EXACTLY HOW MUCH THE COMPLAINANTS FCOD ITENS ‘TOTAL LED: up -
BUT SHE. WAS CERTAIN THAT HE WAS GIVEN CHANSE FROM THE $496.22. BILL.
THE COMPLAINANT THEN ‘EXITED THE STORE BY ‘WAY oF THE- FRONT DOGRS AND “BEGAN
ING EAST ACKOSS THE PARKING LOT WITH A SINGLE BAG OF GROCERIES IN HIS HARD.«
APPROXIMATELY. 28’ EAST OF THE FRONT DOORS OF THE STORE AN UNKNOWN BLACK MALE uas
SEEN APPROACHING. THE COMPLAINANT FROM THE REAR AND IT APPEARED THAT HE WAS REACK
ING OUT TRYING TO GET HIS HAND INTO THE COMPLAINANTS BACK POCKET. E -COMPLAIN—-
ANT ATTEMPTED TO GET OUT OF THE REACH OF THE BLACK FISLE BY TURNING HIS BODY SO-*
AS TO PREVENT THE -BLACK..MALE FROM GETTING INTQ HIS POCKETS. WHEN HE DID THIS~THE
BLACK MALE REACHED GUT “AND GRABBED THE’ COMPLAINANT BY THE THROAT AND PUT “A -PIS—
TOL TG HIS HEAD. a 8 :
FEARING THAT THE CORPLAINANT was GOING ‘To BE .SHOT THE “ga -UITNESS, BERNADINE:
SKILLERN, WHG WAS SITTING IN HER.VEHICLE AWAITING HER DAUGHTER TC RETURN FR
INSIDE THE STORE, BEGAN HONKING HER HORN. WHEN SHE DID THIS THE. BLACK FALE.
LOGKED UP TOWAROS HER AND WHEN HE-DID THIS THE CORPLATNAD roe AWAY FROR
HIS GRASF. AS THE COMPLAINANT BEGAN BACKING AWAY THE SUSPECT FIRED GNE SHOT.
FROW HIS GUN AND THE COMPLAINANT DROPPED THE GROCERIES 4 ‘RE HAD BEEN HOLD =
DANIEL SG. GRADY:~
THE SUSPECT THEN TURNED ARGUND AND BEGAN WALKING BRISKLY AWAY FRGM WHERE HE HAD
BEEN STRUSGLING WITH THE EORPLAINANT. SEEING THAT THE CORPLAINANT WAS SHOT: THE
4 WITNESS DROVE’ HER GAR TO- THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE STORE FOLLGWING.THE: «2
SUSPECT. WHEN THE SUSPECT, REALIZED THAT HE WAS BEING -PURSUED HE BEGAN RUN :ING
AND HE WAS'LAST SEEN RUNNING EAST DOWN THE NORTHSIDE OF THE SAFEWAY STORE. <
“FEARING THAT HER CHILDREN RIGHT BE PLACED IN SOME DANGER THE "4 WITNESS - ;
GAVE UP THE IDEA’OF FOLLOWING THE SUSPECT AND RETURNED re THE ‘FRONT OF THE
STORE TG SEE IF SHE. COULD. BE OF SONE ASSISTANCE. <->
FOLLOWING THE SHOOTING THE COMPLAENANT FELL AGAINST THE 82 WITNESSES VEE
AND THE &2 WITNESS THEN GOT QUT OF HIS VEHICLE AND CARRIED THE COMPLAINS?
SIDE THE STORE | WHERE HE ATTEMPTED TO TREAT HIS GUNSHOT. WOUND.- ¢ 2
WAS-LATER- LEARNED THAT THE. SUSPECT HAD BEEN SEEN INSIDE THE STORE AT -THE “SANE
TInt AS THE COMPLAINANT AND HAD EVEN BEEN SEEN WALKING BREU SND THE STORE FOLLGW-
ING THE Cam LALNANT
IT Is BELIEVED THAT THE HOTIVE FOR THE SHOOTING ‘WAS “ROB ERY AS WE FOUND THAT THE
°
meee aer tra @ ) orrense acrant HIE KH HK RK KK RRR RN
INCIDENT NO. 625287 gat Jy OFFENSE REPORT - a4 PAGE 2.@29
TNS LUM RAAT ESN CINE HWEE JIC SK Ie IIT FEO REO EIA EE,
COnPLAINANT WAS CARRYING A LARGE AMOUNT OF CASH ($6,882.88) ON HIS PERSON.- ~~
WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE SUSPECT HIGHT HAVE SEEN THE COMPLAINANT WITH THIS.
MONEY AS HE CARRIED IT IN HIS BACK LEFT PANTS POCKET FOLDED UP AND FOLLOWED
HIM QUTSIDE GF THE STGRE WHERE HE ATTEMPTED To ROS HIM. IT IS pune et BE- -.
LIEVED THAT THE SUSPECT DID GET THE COMPLAINANTS CAR KEYS AND THE CHANSE HE ->
RE CEIVEG ‘WHEN HE PAID FOR HIS GROCERIES. THE - EXACT ‘ANGUNT IS NOT KNOWN BUT”
T IS LESS THAN $4@9.@0, - ; : ; ; i.
* 2 . E Fd . i i
INTERVIEW OF WITNESSES: © = x se a ,
44 BERNADINE SKILLERN- NE 33, DOB 5-26-48, 2202 DRAYTON; ‘HOME “PHONE 445-4562, -
EMPOLYED AS A CLERK’ FOR THE HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, PHONE 694-2843
MRS. SKILLERN: AND HER DAUGHTER, RHONDA, ARRIVED AT THE SAFEWAY STORE TONIGHT at:
APPROXIMATELY 9:38PM. MAS. SKILLERN PARKED HER CAR IN THE CENTER DRIVWAY LEADING
TO THE FRONT ENTRANCE GF THE STORE AND WAITED: IN THE CAR. WHILE HER -DAUSHTER +
ENTERED THE STORE. WHILE SITTING IN HER CAR SHE: OBSER' & BAG OF -
GROCERIES WALKING EAST THRU THE PARKING LOT. AS THE W. FRONT OF 7-3
HER VEHICLE & YGUNG BLACK FALE APPROACHED THE W/# FROM HIS LEFT SIDE AND WAS | +
ATTEMPTING TO GET INTO THE-W/F’S REAR PARTS POCKET. THE W/i BEGAN URNENG:
FROM SIDE TG-SIDE TO GET QUT OF THE N/M’S GRASP @ND WHEN HE DID THIS THE. N/A
GRASBED HIM BY THE: SHIRT COLLAR AND PUT A GUN TO HIS HEAD. ~
RRS. SRILLERN FEARED TRAT THE N/M WAS GOING ’TO SHGOT THE W/K SO SHE STARTED :
BLOWING HER HORN AND WHEN SHE DID THIS THE N/M TURNED TCHWARDS ae AND AT THIS:
TINE THE Ais PULLED AWAY FROM THE N/M. MRS. SKILLERN. THEN HEARD A POF MOISE
AND SAe T! w/h DROP HIS GROCERIES AND FALL UP AGAINST A CAR. 7 PECT THEN
TURNED ARGUND AND BEGAN WALKING AWAY AND HRS. SKILLERN STARTED ICLE AND --
BEGAN FOLLOWING THE N/M AS HE WALKED THRU THE PARKING LOT. WHEN THE N/M REALIZEE
HE WAS BEING FOLLOWED HE BRGKE INTC A RUN HEADING WEST BEL 5 THE STCRE. THIS ~7
WAS THE LAST TINE HRS.SKILLERN SAU THE N/M AN DSHE DESCRIBED HIN AS BEING A
N/M, 48-28 “YEARS OLD, 5/46" TG 6’, SLIM BUILD, SLIM FACE, CLEAN SHAVEN, CLOSE
CUT AFRS, WEARING A WHITE: ET ran BLACK SLACKS AND’ CARRYING A BLACK. “GUN ee
WITH A LONG BARRELL. . .
“
my
FOR FURTHER DETAILS SEE THE ATTACHED WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THIS WITNESS. . --
2. DANIEL ‘SOSEPH.GRADY. W/N 35, DOB 8-4-45, 9429 BERWYN, HOME PHONE 448-2442, _-
SELF EMPLOYED WITH HIS BUSINESS PHONE -BEING THE “SAM DANIEL GRADY AND HIS. WIFE.
PEGGY W/F 33, ARRIVED AT THE SAFEWAY STORE TONIGHT SHORTLY AFTER 9PM: DANIEL RE-
RAINED IN HIS CAR WHICH HE HAD PARKED IN THE MIDSOLE ISLE LEAST: c
ENTRANCE TO THE STORE WHILE HIS WIFE WENT INSIDE TG GROCERY SHOP.
RONENTS “AFTER: HIS WIFE WENT INSIDE THE STORE DANTEL” GRADY SAU A U/n WALKING
OUT OF THE STORE. A TALL SLI BLACK MAN WITH SHORT HAIR WALKED UP -TG THE W/i -
AND BEGAN SHOVING THE W/M AND THEY GOT INTO WHAT LOGKED LIKE A SHOVING HATCH. -
| THE W/ AND THE N/R BROKE APART AND THE W/M DROPPED THE GROCERIES HE HAD BEEN
| CARRYING AND THEN THEY GOT INTO IT AGAIN AND IT APPEARED THAT THE N/M WAS TRY- =
| ING TG GET THE W/H’S BILLFOLD OUT OF HIS POCKET -WHEN THE N/M CAME UP WITH
PISTOL AND SHOT THE -W/M. THE W/R FELL UP AGAINST DANIE: GRADY'S VEHICLE AND:
THE SUSPECT RAN TOWARD GULFBANK ROAD. DANIEL GRADY THEN GOT OUT OF HIS CAR
AND AT JENeTED TO AID THE W/R =
it
DANIEL GRADY DESCAIBED THE N/T 4s TALL, SLIM, YGUNG, WEARING A Uh
; AKD CARRYING - A SHALL CALIBER PISTOL. GRADY WAS RELUCTANT TO SAY
HE COULD IDENTIFY THE SUSPECT BUT SAID HE UGULD CERTAINLY TRY.
TAILS SEE THE ATTACH! ED-WRITTEN STATERENT OF DANEEL GRADY.
a
INCIDENT NO. 62528788 OFFENSE REPORT cs PAGE: 2.848.
KEK RK IKK EEK IK HEI FOIA BRIER SHOES SER EER aS LEER
3. WILFA AROS N/F 32, DOB 3-4-49,-864G WHITE CASTLE, HOME PHONE 999-G254,-
EMPLOYED AS A TRUCK DRIVER WITH A DELIVERY SERVICE, PHONE 974-@557-. ALTHOUGH
NGT PRESENT AT THE SCENE WHEN WE ARRIVED MRS. AMOS CONTACTED ‘THE HOMICIDE DI
USS ON eno BUSSE THAT SHE Hab WITNESSED: THE SHOOTING AND GAVE THE FOLLOWING
INF ORK: . : .
sheoent NO, ezszerect CO) Sp urrence never?) ERE R RR ES,
TONIGHT - AT APPROXIMATELY 9:45PM SHE WENT TO-THE SAFEWAY - “STORE AT: 898@ NORTH
FREEWAY TO GET A HALF GALLON. OF HILK. WHILE-INSIDE THE STORE SHE WALKED BACK Ta:
THE DAIRY SECTION AND ON'HER WAY BACK UP TO THE FRONT OF “THE STGRE “SHE OBSERVEDs
A W/M SHOPPING AND HE WAS LOOKING AT -~SOME GLOVES.- SHE “ALSO NOTICED THAT A N/M
DRESSED “IN A WHITE SPORT COAT-AND BLACK PANTS APPEARED-TO BE WATCHING THE H/tt
SHE DIO.NOT THINK MUCH ABOUT IT AND WENT-TO-THE FRONT: TO THE STGRE AND CHECKED:-4
GUT AND WALKED TO HER VAN WHICH WAS PARKED ON THE NORTHSIOE OF THE MAIN ENTRANCE
«AS SHE OPENED THE DOOR TO HER.VAN SHE HEARD SOME COMMOTION AND WHEN SHE TURNED
AROUND SHE HEARD & GUNSHOT FOLLOWED BY SEEING THE SAME N/M WHG SHE HAD SEEN-=>.4
INSIDE THE STORE RUNNING WITH BOTH HANDS IN HIS POCKETS. THIS N/M RAN “PAST
HER AND DOWN THE NORTHSIDE OF THE STORE AND ARSDUND THE BACK: OF THE BUILDING
WHEN SHE WENT QVER TO SEE WHO HAD BEEN SHOT SHE DISCOVERED THAT IS WAS THE
SAME W/M WHG SHE HAD SEEN INSIDE THE STGRE SHOPPING. FOR SORE. GLOVES. -SHESA/H
WHO SHOT.THE W/m- WAS ALsO-~ HE HAN WHO WASSFB! SEO ENG “PENH AROUND INST)
THE STORE.
. ° s
ARS. ands DESC: AIBED “THE SUSPECT - AS: ‘AN/M IN-HIS 20°S;-“SHORT. DARK HAIR: “CLEAN 28h
SHAVEN, WEARING BLACK SLACKS AND’ A WHITE COAT. MRS.AMOS IS CERTAIN, SHE CAN IDENZ
ee THE SUSPECT. DUE TO THE LATE HOUR WE REQUESTES THAT SHE €ORE TO THE HOAT~. 4
IGE DiVISICGN ON? THURSDAY AE TERNGSN aT 4PM FOR A WRITTEN, STATEMENT.” * ~~ 3
: ot oa
THE FOLLOW JING EHPOLYEE? S WERE WORKING INSIDE TH SAFEWAY STGRE.ON THE NIGHT GF”
THE OFFENSE: ° : a ‘
“4. PRS HARSHALL CPATI JOHNSON W/F 430 te :
2132 HIERIANNE |. - at i =
HORE PHONE 442- 8648 . ae . Lo, cot:
THIS EMPLOYEE WAS THE CLERK in. CHARGE OF THE STORE AS THE
Y.SHE WAS nr ONE OF THE AISLES OF THE STORE. WHEN THE OFFE! co te
PRICE CHANGES AND DID NOT. WITNESS THE OFFENSE . SHE DID NOT RECALL SEEING EITHER 3
THE SUSPECT OR CORPLAINANT IN THE _ STORE. Powe
‘2. NANCY GONZALEZ’ LA/F 43
$623 “GALE u2
HORE PHONE 624- 8294
THIS ERPLOYEE WAS WORKING INSIDE THE COURTESY Booth OF: THE -STORE- WHICH IS NORTH
OF. THE. CASH REGISTERS.SHE-DID NOT.SEE THE OFFENSE AND WAS. MADE AWARE OF THE>-+
OFFENSE WHEN ANOTHER EMPLOYEE CALLED OUT “HE’S BEEN SHOT.HE’S BEEN SHOT" FOR
APPROXIMATELY 415 MINUTES PRIOR TO THE OFFENSE ‘THIS EMPLOYEE HAD BEEN WATCHING -Th
E AREG OF THE CASH REGISTERS AND FRONT - DOOR: BUT DOES NOT. REMEMBER SEEING EITHER
SUSPECT OR CORRLAINANT IN THE STORE. ~~ a -
3.SHERIAN. ELUK B/F2S,,
4 ALLEN PARKWAY
CHORE PHONE 651-8436
THIS EMPLOYEE WAS CHECKING” AT REGISTER 14 WHICH Is THE FIRST REGISTER SQUTH OF
THE COURTESY BOOTH.SHE SAID SHE WAS WAITING ON A CUSTOMER AND HEARD A "PGPY ~ :
FROM THE PARKING LOT.SHE LOGKED OUT THE WINDOWS AND SAU A B/N WEARING A WHITE
on _ a JO
CIDENT NG. 62528786 OFFENSE REPORT » | aa PAGE 2,944
presenter reer a FIRE IEE RIES HAIER KES IEE EE
BLAZER JACKET AND BLACK SLACKS IN THE PARKING LOT.SHE SAYS SHE. COULD; NOT-GEE-HIg
FACE DUE. TG. THE GLASS-"OF-THE WINDOWS: AND DARK: PARKING20T BUT COULD TELL HE 7
WAS BACKING AWAY FROM THE COMPLAINANT WITH ‘HIS LEFT HAND DOWN: TO’ HIS: SIDE AND *
RIGHT HAND AT HIS WAIST.SHE COULO NGT TELL IF. HE HAD ANYTHING IN HIS-HANDS AND .
SAID HE WAS WALKING BACKWARDS LOSKING FROM SIDE TO SIDE.HKE BACKED UNTIL GOING ou
7,OF HER VISION DUE 7O A CONCRETE COLUMN OF THE FRONT: OF THE STGRE AND COLD DREN
K RACHINES INSIDE THE STORE.SHE THEN NOTICED THE COMPLAINANT WALKING INTO THE ST
ORE FROM THE. PARKING LOT AND NOTICED HE HAD BEEN SHOTJAS THE-CGNPLAINANT ENTERED
THE STORE HE FELL-IN THE DOORWAY AND SEVERAL CITIZENS CMAE TS HIS AID WITH ICE,
PAPER TOWELS AND NAPKINS FROM Ane STORE. © ~ 20
Se ere Sip Mee ee ne
4 HESCHELL” GILLIAN BIE we.
4G3 W.WHITNEY =”
_ HOHE" PHONE 694- “8595.
THIS EMPLOYEE WAS WORKING “REGISTER 8 2 WHICH IS SOUTH oF 4 REGISTER. SHE state:
SHE HEARD 83 SAY “HE‘S~ ‘BEEN SHOT" AND SAW THE COMPLAINANT COME BACK IN .THE STORE
AND FALL.SHE SAYS. SHE HAD CHECKED QUT THE COMPLAINANT Ns “HE MADE HIS PURCHASES-
AND HE PAID HER WITH & $. 468.84 BILL AND COIN CHANGE.SHE SAYS SHE HAS BEEN WORKI
NS-A SHGRT TINE AT. THE STORE AND SAW THE COMPLAINANT ONE TIME BEFORE ON SUNDAY «
5-48-84 IN. THE STORE.SHE SAID THE COMPLAINANT SEENED REAL NICE-7G HER ,EXCHANGE-
ING Pee ennitiks WHILE SHE ECKED HIM OUTJSHE DID-NOT.SEE THE SUSPECT AND DOES -
NOT REMEMBER ANYONE BETTING: HIS DESCKIPTION INSIDE THE STORE AT ANY "TIRE .~
5. RARY. STEVENSON B/F 34 - ao . a
“543 W.DONAVAN : ; sos :
PHONE 697-9326
- HORE
STORE AND -BECANF
< uAS IN THE
© THE STORE.SHE. DOES NOT. REMEMBER ANY ONE FITTING THE DESCRIPTION OF /THE
IN THE STORE. ;
HPLOYEE SAYS SHE WAS DOINS COMPUTOR TAGS “EL SEUHERE:
a
é. RONALD HUBBARD : . ; *
. 4454 DIPLOMAT WAY ~ - ; ce te
__ HUME PHONE 447-6876 .
HTS " ERPLOYEE HAD LEFT THE SCENE WHEN DETECTIVES ARRI ~TNFS
NED FROM THE STORE.ACCORDING- 1G SHERTON ELUK HE WAS SACK
GISTERCH 43 WHEN THE OFFENSE OCCURRED. ~ -
RAATON ‘ON ADDRESS®
ING GROCERIES AT ->
:DEBRA NIXON eM
823 BLEKER ST
635-5848
THIS ENPLOVEE HAD ALSO LEFT THE SCENE PRIOR TO DETECTIVES. ARRIVAL .SHE SHOULO Hé
E HECKING -AT REGISTER BB. oe / :
E PITTING THe DESCRIPTION OF THE SUSPECT. has BEEN TROES INS OTHER
GRES BY JUMP PING OVER THE COURTESY BOOTH. ae
KERERENRERERRE ERENT ge RAR RR Rann
NCIDENT NO. 825287894 2 OFFENSE REPORT .-- Que PAGE 2.042
R
HK KEKE EME KE KR EE KEK KERRIER FI EI I ERE TOROS IEE ESSE
HILE STILL AT THE SCENE WE WERE INFORNED ‘THAT A URECKE.@ORIVER, DAVID: SMITH
AD HEARD THE BROADCAST OF THE ROBBERY SHOOTING-ON HIS MONITOR AND DRIVEN TO.
HE STGRE WHERE HE LEARNED THAT -THE SUSPECT HAD FLED THE SCENE. DAVID SMITH!
ROVE BACK INTO THE AREA BEHIND THE STORE AND WHILE APPROACHING STUZENER- AIR~
INE HE CAME UPON @ SUSPICIOUS %Z“PLYMOUTH, -UHITE: OVER BLUE: OCCUPIED BY 2-N/n’S i}
HE LICENSE NUMNBER”ON THIS ‘VEHICLE WAS -KWTS3S. SMITH-COULD NOT GIVE. ANY FURTHER €:
ESCRIPTIGN ON THE GCCUPANTS BUT IT WAS HIS OPINION THEY WERE ACTING SUSPICIOUS.:
0 HE NOTED THE LICENSE NUMBER ‘OF THE VEHICLE. ~—- ~~ : a.
ANID SRITH LIVES AT 3423 ‘ACORNUAY, PHONE 353-4328.
ERSON WANTED: — UNKNOUN AV, 5°40" TO 6’, 48 TO-25 YEARS-OF AGE, SLIM. BUILD: 4
; : SHORT AFRO, DARK COMPLEXION, CLEAN SHAVEN, “SLIM FACE. WEARING
BLACK PANTS AND A WHITE SPORT-COAT. 0 iis
WEAPGN: UNKNOUN CALIBER REVOLVER, BLUE STEELS: +
(INVESTIGATION TO CONTINUE... - -_ Sa - |
3UPPLENENT ENTERED BY = 42332 ~~: --
OFFENSE> CAPITAL MURDER = - ;
“STREET LoceT TON INFORMATION: <-73
NURBER- «8935 NARE-NORTH |. . TYPE-FWY - ~~ SUFFIX-
DATE GF OFFENSE-@5/ 43/84 ~ | + DATE OF -SUPPLENENT-@5/44/84 - -
COMFLES) LAST-LAMBERT -- -FIRST-BOBBY ~~ MIDDLE-GRANT~ -. ~
— RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION: ©.~!s .--
NONE Js
OFFICER 4-W.U.QWEN : EMPH-G42332 SHIFT-2 DIV/STATION-HOMICIDE + +r
OFFICER2-J.W.ELLIS . . ENPE-83 1808 /SHIFT~2 Fo watts
“SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE-
PROGRESS REPORT: ~ ag 8
WE, DETECTIVES ELLIS AND OWEN, LEFT THE -SCENE AND DROVE NORTH OUT -THE NORTH FREE
WAY TO THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL, GREENSPOINT. ONCE THERE WE SPGKE WITH THE DESK
CLERK, AL SHARIFF PHONE 447-6344. WE SHOWED HIM THE KEY WHICH WE HAD RECOVERED
FROM THE-BODY OF THE COMPLAINANT AND HE VERIFIED THAT IT WAS A KEY TO A BEST
WESTERN MOTEL. WE SHOWED ‘HIM THE COMPLAINANTS GREGON DRIVER’ 8 LICENSE PHOTO AND
; HE INDICATED THAT HE DID NOT RCOGNIZE THE CONPLAINANT=
IN: CHECKING MOTEL RECORDS CLERK SHARIFF FOUND FHAT- Roon 268 HAD BEEN REGISTERED
IN THE NAFIE OF RONALD MN. ALLEN, ADDRESS 784 UCLAN.: BURBANK CALIFORNIA, EMPLOYED
| AT FOXCG INOUSTRIES IN ENCINO CALIFORNIA. ‘ALLEN HAD CHECKED OUT TONIGHT AT 9:85
[CH WITH THE EVENING. SHIFT DESK CLERK“DIANA ROLAND, HOME PHONE 289- 4628. THE BILL-
HAD BEEN PAID IN CASH. -THERE WERE A NUMBER OF LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE CALLS MADi
(RERER ER RRR ERT RRR on “=
‘NCIDENT NO. @25287884 ‘OFFENSE REPORT. @ PAGE 2.415
crucinarere: Mates yo
"ROH ue ROOM AND ‘THEY WERE FOLLOWS: _
S/44 24226 243-849-5346
2742 48:89 243-844-3886 ° - : a,
5/44 26:48 243-845-4469 si : oe
S/44 47224 286-365-6699 ~~ : . F
-S/44 46:88 286-342-8086
5/44 42287 243-845-4463
S/44 44234
5/44 43:55 2867362-8080 - :
'S/4B 42548 243-849-5346 - - sa
S/4B 42267" 243-999-4323 « F Z
5/43. 49:55 662-886-3438 - my :
‘5/43 47207 782-362-3456 - wo et Be ke _
5/43 47224 206-365-6699 ete 8K ae
5/43 4728 782-362-3456 - - : > ~ ane
5/43 89:39 243-628-4980" : ”
5/43 20:58 485-751-7623 wt - os
ACCOMPANIED BY THE MOTEL "SECURITY GUARD BLEN MATHER WE wb To ROOM 288 AND ONCE
INSIDE THE ROOM WE FOUND SEVERAL CLEANING RECEIPTS WITH THE COMPLAINANTS NAME- ON
THER. WE .ALSG FOUND TWO DIFFERENT BRANDS OF CIGARRETTS IN THE ASHTRAY, ONE BEING
CONSISTENT WITH THE BRAND THE COMPLAINANT SMOKES ‘AND THE OTHER DIFFERENT. WE RE
I TRIEVED THE CIGARETTE BUTT FROM. THE ASHTRAY AS WELL AS SEVERAL PIECES OF PAPER
WITH NAMES AND PHONE NUMBERS ON THEN. WE QUESTIONED GUARD MATHER ABDUT THE DES:
CRIPTION. OF THE SUSPECT AND HE SAID HE WAS NOT AWARE THAT THERE WERE ANY N/M‘S
ERPLOYED AT TRE MOTEL.
Sveurseti’
?
z
i
WE WENT TO THE BAR WHERE WE TALKED uITH CHARBAINE ‘TERRI PENA W/F 25, DOB S-4 44-86
ADDRESS 4655 BLUE BELL 8238, PHONE 820-583, WORK PHONE 447-6344. MISS PENA --"
IS EMPLOYED AS A BARTENDER AND HAS ONLY WORKED AT THE CLUB SINCE“ MONDAY MAY
44. WE SHOWED HER A PHOTG OF THE CORPLAINANT AND SHE INDICATED THAT, SHE HAD .
NOT SEEN HIM IN THE CLUB SINCE-SHE BEGAN WGRKING THERE GN RONDAY. HISS PENA
ADVIS. US THAT ANGTHER FEMALE NAMED JUDY WORKED IN THE BAR BUT SHE HAD BONE -
FOR THE “NIGHT “BUT WOULD BE BACK TORGEROM iNIGHT AT BPH. :
WE LEFT THE SCENE AND WENT TO THE. RORGUE AND PROVIDED ME “INVESTIGATOR J.C.
THORSSON WITH THE LIST OF LONG DISTANCE CALLS MADE BY WHOEVER WAS STAYING IN :
ROGH 285. IN CALLING 243-844-3686HE SPOKE WITH MRS. RON ALLEN WHO ADVISED THAT
HER, HUSBAND HAD BEEN IN HOUSTON ON BUSINESS BUT.HAD LEFT TODAY AND WAS NOW. IN
LAS VEGAS. SHE WENT. GN TO SAY THAT AN ASSOCIATE OF HER HUSBANDS. BOSEY LAMBERT
Hac. BEEN STAYING WITH HER HUSBAND AT THE BEST. WESTERN, GREENSPOINT. ARS. ALLEN
| WAS INFORMED OF- THE. DEATH OF THE COMPLAINANT AND SHE PROVICED NEL THGMASON WITH
| THE NAME OF THE COMPLAINANTS WIFE. LORETTA ANN LAMBERT) ADDRESS 2432 “NORTH
INGIAN RUINS, TUCSON ARIZONA, PHONE 682-884-3438. MRS. ALLEN WAS VERY VAGUE:
GK WHAT BUSINESS THE COMPLAINANT HAD IN HOUSTON. SHE DID SAY THAT THE Con-
PLAINANT AND HIS WIFE HAD -RECENTLY SEPERATED. WE -REGUESTED THAT BER HER HUS~
BAND RETURNS HONE THAT SHE HAVE HIM GET aN TOUCH “WITH US.-
MORGUE THOMASON RECEIVED.A CALL. FROM THE-COMPS WIFE, LORETTA
AND SGT CALLAN WITH THE PIHA COUNTY ARIZONA SHERRIFS DEPT WHO HAD NOTIFS
iRS “LAMBNERT OF HER HUSBANDS DEATH.PINA COUNTY HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN CONTACTED
BY THOMASON. SGT. CALLAN TOOK INFORWATION Fai: THOMASON AS TO ARRAINGEMENTS NEEDE
-D-30 BE MADE BY THE WIFE.WHEN. THOMASON TOLD HIH ABOUT’ THE $46@@@.a@ GN THE COMP,
SST CALLAN SAID IN REGARDS TO THE LAST THING YOU TGLD ME-I WILL GET BACK TO You
GON IT.THE WAY HE SAID THIS TG THONASON ADE HIM-THINK THAT THE SGT DID NOT WANT
THE COnPS WIFE RADE AWARE OF THE MONEY AT THE TIME SO THOMASON ASKED IF THERE
‘NCIDENT NO. 9252a7G01 @® OFFENSE REPORT PASE 2.444
RRR RE RRR IHRE EHR E RHE KEE Derren ® wseetenacsal
AS SOMETHING HE NEEDED TO .cfL THE HOMICIDE DETECTIVE. REGARDS TO THE ‘Cone
GT CALLAN SAID HE. WOULD CONTACT DETECTIVE. ELLIS AFTER HE LEFT THE COMPS (WIFE.
FTER ARRIVING IN THE HOMICIDE ‘OFFICE ELLIS “RECEIVED f& CALL FROM set TALLAN. HE”
sAID THAT HE HAD CHECKED ON THE COMP AND “RECEIVED: & HIT. ON THE NATIGNAL- NARCOTL
} INFORMATION-CENTER ON THE COHF AS HAVING NARCOTICS ARRESTS.HE SAID HE WOULD
JET THE INFORMATION ON THE ARRESTS AND FORWARD THEM TO ELLIS BY TWIX.HE ASKED
JHEN THE COMP CAME TG: HOUSTON AND “WHEN TOLD THE ROOM HAD BEEN RENTED TO RAYMOND }
WLLEN SINCE S-4-84,CALLAN SAID THERE HAD. BEEN A 2 MILLION BANK ROBSERY IN TUSCON
JUST PRIOR TO THAT AND REQUESTED THE SERIAL NUMBERS ON THE BILLS IN THE COMPS
‘OSESSION BE CHECKED FOR STOLEN.CALLAN CAN BE “REACHED AT “682- “62 29386 €24 HOUR
rms. COUNTY NUMBERS «HIS BADGE” NUPBER IS 9524. . sO ,
nll Teresa
j
°F
$
“LLIS LATER RECEIVED A CALL FROM 4 FFICER HADALCA- arte PIMA COUNTY.HE SAID THAT 3
{N CHECKING ON THE CONP HE FOUND THAT THE-COMP HAD SEVERAL KNOUR“ASSOCEATES 51,
WARCOTICS TRAFFIC.HE IS GOING 7G CHECK GN THER TQ FIND OUT IF ANY WERE” BLACK
4E HAD ALSO FOUND THAT THE COMP WAS ARRESTED AT THE OKLAHOMA CITY AIRPORT ON:
3-44-88 WITH 48,86@ BUALUDE PILLS AND SEVERAL OUNCES-OF COCAIN.THIS IS..DEA .
CASE % 8G592L. AT THAT TIME THE COMP GAVE THE ADDRESS GF 2825 RANDOLPH EN 7
CARMICHAEL CALIFORNIA. MAJALCA SAID HE WOULD RELAY-INFORMATION BY TWIX.
aT APPRGOXIRATELY 7:@@AM ELLIS RECEIVED A CALL FROM JCANN-FERGUSON.W/F --- - 7%
3544 RODADE, HORE PHONE 464-4675, U0KK 654-8877. SHE SAID SHE HAD HEARD OF -THE
3FFENSE ON THE RADIO AND SAID LAST WEEK WHILE AT THE WEINGARTENS STCRE ON
E YORK AND -N.HGUSTON ROSSLYN A 3/1 TRIED TO GRAB HER PURSE FROM BERIN:
AYS THAT A FRANK LEGSIC WHG Hee TG BE AN ARSON INVESTIGATOR GAVE CHASE ON 4
THE 8/H WHO TRIED TO GRAS THE PURSE AFTER HE GOT -INTO A CAR WITH TWO OTHER.B/M
Sid TOLD HER THEY ESCAPED “IN & Bi CK-GR PONTIAC WITH TEX LIC KEC325, CHE WAS -
= OF THE LICENSE NUAGERI.NRS FERGUSON SAID SKE HAS NOT WADE A REPS: RT ON THE
IDENT SINCE SHE COULD NOT ID THE SUSPECT AND THEY DIO NOT GET HER FURSE.SHE
T THERE WAS AN GUTSIDE CHANCE THAT THE SUSPECTS HAY BE THE SAME AND WANTE!
US THE LICENSE INFORBATION SHe HAD.THE -B/M THAT. TRIED TO GRAS “HER PURSES
BS’ 48". CHUNKY WEARING &-T-SHIRT AND SEANS. ~- . :
3
z
i
STREET LOCATION INFORMATION ~~ 3
iN 8935 NARE-NORTH TYPE-FUY SUFFIX-
6. QF GFFENSE-85/ 413/84 : DATE OF SUFFLEMENT™“@5/ 44784
COMPLCS) LAST-LAMBERT 3 FIRST-BOBBY - MIDDLE-GRANT
. RECOVERED STOLEN VENTELES INFORD RATIGN
EMP &- 837450 SHIFT-2 DIV/STATIGN-
|
| . Es
| Seles serresentee >
sey bocsaeaa; WARN RRR Rn ne serosa
INCIDENT: NO. 825207894 BFFENSE: REPORT -~ PAGE 2.445
ie fers Rly SOI RIE ARI AEE ® Lemme
“SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE
8 . = ’
SUPPLEMENT DATED evita:
OFFICER REC’D CALL TO ASGVE LOCATION IN REGARDS TO SHOOTINS AMBULANCE CALL aT.
2040. -UPON ARRIVLA OFFICER WAS MET BY 84 WIT CDAN GRAVY WN35,. 8489 BREWIN, -;
2g 448024423, AND BY B2 WIT CBERAGINE SK ILLERN BF34, 2226 DRAYTON PS pares
IR 694-2843}. . :
THE 24 & H2 WIT STATED THAT THEY HAD BEEN IN THEIR- CARS AND HAD. SEEN “THE conPL.
TONE GUT OF THE. STORE WITH A SACK-GF GROCERIES. AS THE COMPL ARRIVED IN FRONT *
JF THE WITS CARS. THE WITS SAW A BLACK HALE CSUSP) APPROACHED THE CO! -..THE °.
AJITS STATED ‘THAT’ THE SUSP TRIED TO GRAB THE CORPL GROCERIES AND HIS U LET."
THE SUSP GRABBED CORFL BY THE FRGNT OF HIS- SHIRT.- THE COMPL HANDED CWHAT WITS.
BELIEVED] WAS A WALLET TO THE SUSP. THE SUSP-THEN PUSHED THE COMPL BACK AND ~~
RAISED A PISTOL AND FIRED 4 ROUND IN THE CHEST OF THE CSMPL. -THE SUS? THEN
RAN NORTHWEST AROUND THE ones OF THE BLDG AND THEN WEST ON W. GULF -BANK.. “THES
COMPL THEN DROPPED His GROC ES ANG WALKED Back ENTG THE STORE WHERE HE FELL.
fee heatiades lee ee
OFFICER FOUND THE CORFL cYINnc ON HIS STOMACH IN THE DOORWAY ‘OF THE STORE. HFD
UNIT 4467 CPA ERZON Da: CA MICHAELS) EXAHINED THE. CORPL AND TGLD OFFICER HE WAS"
DGA. CEFICER THEN SECURED THE SCENE AND CALLED FOR Ha? MICIDE. HE, AND BODY CAR.
SCENE WAS ECURED UNTIL HOMICIDE ARRIVED.- SCENE TURNED QVER 16 ELLIS AND QUENS,
OFPENSE- CAPITAL RURDER * . _ eo Sk .
- “STREET LOCATION INFORMATICN - "
NURBER- 8935 NAHE-NGRTH “ -TYPE-FUY 0° SUFFIX-
CATE OF CFFENSE-@5/ 43/84 . DATE OF SUPPLEMENT-@5./ 44/84
CORFLCS) EaeT LASSERT “IRST-BO8BY MIDDLE-GRANT
a As : RECOVERED STOLEN. VEHICLES INFORRATICN: ' ‘
IONE %, E
“OFFICER 4-D.W.AUTREY oS ERP &-838476 SHIFT~4 DIV/STATION-HOMICIDE
SU#PLENENT NARRATIVE. +!
REPORT: .. 0 ~ re -
UTREY ASSIGNED TO CONTINUE. THE INVESTIGATION INTO. THE @BGVE CASE
T
2222 STUDEWOGD TO THE. HUBBARD STORAGE LOT WHERE THE CCOMPLS. VAN. -
i I TALKED WITH FR. HUSBARD AND EXPLAINED TO HIM WHO I WAS AND
GLO LIKe FO GO. THROUGH THE COMPLS. VAN ONCE MORE AND TAKE A BE
ITS CONTENTS. MR. HUBBARG PRODUCED & KEY TG THE VAN AND SAID HE WOULD
ANUAVENI- NU. 825287884 y OFFENSE .REFGRT 5-. :
FREKRRKKRERK KEKE RKKEKRKKET ERE KKK ERLE KKK HK KU HERE FARA IIK ARENT
“TAKE RE TO IT. I ASKED h_WHERE HE GOT THE KEY AND ME STATED THE URECKER BAN
HUST HAVE BROUGHT IT IN WHEN HE BROUGHT THE VAN -IN.C THE WRECKER DRI
NGT AVALABLE FOR GUESTIONINGS THE KEY DID NOT FIT THE DOOR OF THE VAX
DID FIT THE IGNITION.
ro: - ve
or SEARCHED THE CONTENTS OF THE VAN FOR EVIDENCE “IN THIS “CASE AND NOTED ‘sone -
TEMS THAT WERE NOTE LISTED IN THE EARLIER REPORT THAT NEED MENTIONING.
-T FGUND A SHALL AMOUNT OF WHAT APFEARED TG MARIGIAUNA IN A SOCK STUCK UP IN 2
4 STORAGE COMPARTRENT AT THE REAR OF THE VAN. I ALSO FCUND ANOTHER SMALL
_ ANGUNT GF WHAT APPEARED TO MARIGIUANA WRAPED UF IN A PEICE OF- TIN FOIL . |:
ae IN SIDE POCKET OF A GOLF BAG. BOTH "WERE TAGGED AND DRBPPED IN ThE LAB
OCK BOX IN HOMICIDE FOR ANAL LYSIS » . 4
I ALSO FOUND THE BELOW PROPERTY IN THE VAN ‘WP: UNDER A STOR LOCKER ON THE 4
“LEFT SIDE OF THE VAN. a
4 42 GA. GVER AND. UNDER SHOTGUN, “MAKE LUIGI FRANCHT » SER. t 2882. we
42 GS. SINT AUTOMATIC RERRINGTON SHOTGUN » SERB N@G4934V, MODLE 4188
46 G4. OVER, AND UNDER BROWNING SER.&.S2875 ~ a .
G3 hd
INSIDE OF 4 BLACK GVERNIGHT BAG. SETING ‘ON THE “ABOVE STORAGE LOCKER I FOUND.~-
i
=
THE BELOW : “oe 3
:
3
:
4 HALINLIGH GOLD LiGH ‘TER WITH & BUILT: i WATCH
2°TRS SS POCKET COMPUTER SER. & &76945 A on
3 NEW HEXICG DRIVERS LICENSE , CANADIGN DRIVERS LICENSE. DRAFT CARD. RADIO
OPERATORS LICENSE, AND INSURANCE CARD ALL UNDER THe: NAME OF BILLY FRANCIS
TH COB 3-1-38 ALONG WITH OTHER ASSORTED PAPERS.CTHESE WILL BE KEPT WITH
THe REPORTS Lt : i
‘I_WENT TG THE COUNTY HGRGUE WHERE I Re
WITH BLGSS GN IT AND RETURNED IT TI
SUCH -TiRc IT IS DRY ENGUGH TO, BE
4.80 WHILE AT THE MGRGUE I RECON iz i ae WHICH IY SUBRITTED?
TO FIREARNS TG BE HELD FUR COMPARISON AT A-LATER DATE IF THE WEAPON: is RECGVERE'
COVERED 4 BLUE AND WHETE PULL OVER SHIRTS
HORICIDE DRYING RGON TG BE LEFT UNTIL-%
aD T = DOTERMINATIO
ceices & PHONE CALL FROM BR. ASHTON D-E.A IN OKL.CITY THIS DATE INQUIRING -7
ABOUT THE COPRL. HE. STAT ED HE HAT A GRAND JURY SUMRGNS FOR THE COMP: "
uS RELATED CASE. HE STATED HE WOULG CALL BACK AT A LATER DATE
ATION. NOTE: WHILE-IN THE VAN I FOUND A COURT DGCKET PAPER FR!
GISTRICT CGURT- IN OKL. ALONG WITH A SAIL RECEIPT FOR MR. LAMBERT.
ND PLACED WITH Tas PASE.
WERE RETA
[RRR RE RR RRR RN RR 6
NCIDENT. NG. 625287884
ae
FFENSE REPORT - sete PAGE 2.847
siaialehalataiaishiisisbeiaisiahsienesin’ > scebeeeceneuaiocan:
10-8886
‘FFENSE- CAPITAL ‘MURDER :
a + STREET ‘LOCATION INFORMATION <.4 ;
UABER- . 9935 NANE-NORTH os TYPE~FWY =) SUFFIX ; |
(ATE OF OFFENSE-85/43/84. - DATE. OF ‘SUPPLENENT-65/44/84 ; :
‘ORPLC(S) LAST-LAMBERT : . «4 FIRST-BOBBY ~° -MIDDLE-GRANT : /
: RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION ;
NONE ; .
(FFICER4-W.U.OUEN ° .. ~~‘ EMPS-G42932 ‘SHIFT-2 BIV/STATION-HOHICE DE
FFICER2-J.W-ELLIS |... - EMPR-G34808 ‘SHIFT-2
> SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE -
‘ROBRESS REPORT: -
JE ETECTIVES. ELLIS AND OWEN, RECEIVED INSTRUCTIONS’ Fay Let TS CONTINUE
THE INVEST IGATION GF THIS CASE.
JHILE IN THE HOMICIDE, ‘DIVISIGN WE RECEIVED A CALL FROM MEL ASHTGN GF THe pRua 4
INFORCENENT ADMINISTRATION IN OKLAHOMA CITY. AGENT ASHTGN WAS INBUIRINS ABOUT
iHE DEATH OF THE CORPLAINANT » BOBBY LAMBERT. ACCORDING TO ASHTGN T DEA HAD
YRRESTED THE CORPLAINANT IN -OKLAHGMA CITY IN OCTOBER GF 4988. THE COMPLAINANT
jAS PILOTING A PLANE CARRYING 48,683 QUALUDES AND SEVERAL OUNCES OF COCAINE.
\SHTON WENT ON TG SAY THAT THE COMPLAINANT WAS FORMERLY AN EMPLOYEE GF SEVERAL
SARNIVALS AND HE FASHIONED HIASELF AS A CON MAN Wid COULD CON ANYONE. THE Con-
?LAINANT. ALSO GAMBLED-AND HE HAG BEEN IN LAS VEGA’S RECENTLY. ONE OF THE COMF 8
*LAINANTS ASSOCIATES IS NAMED RON ALLEN, -RON ALLEN IS A GAMELER AND PO SHARK :3
JHENEVER HE GR THE CONPLAINANT GOT TOGETHER THEY MIGHT BE UP. TC- ANYTHING - 4
“ROM DGPE TO GAHBLING. AS FAR AS BSHTON KNEW EITHER. THE CQHPLALNANT OR ROY o
ALLEN HUNG QUT WITH ANY N/MUS.. og
SKLANGHA CITY SO HE COULD CLOSE OUT HIS FILE ON THE. coeauerianr:
1E NEXT CONTACTED THE &4 WITNESS, BERNADINE SKILLERN AND ASKED IF SHE
WAILABLE TC ASSIST IN GIVING A COMPOSITE DRAWING OF THE SUSPECT. cae
443 EXTREMELY COOPERATIVE BUT INGICATED THAT SHE WOULD BE UNAELE To me
HOMICIDE DIVISION. WE MADE ARRANGEMENTS WITH: HER’ mit) COME, TO THe HEMT
TON IN THE MORNING BETWEEN 8:23@ AND SAR.” - .
JE THEN CALLED DEl BRA. “NIXON,. AN ERPLOYEE OF THE SAFEWAY - STORE: AND LEARNES THAT
DEBRA WAS. GUT. FOR THE EVENING. WE LEFT A MESSAGE WITH HER OTHE! R FOR HER 7O
TALL US WHEN SHE. RETURNED HORE. - 8 y
aE THEN CONTACTED. WILKA ANOS TG ASCERTAIN WHY SHE HAD: NOT SHOWED uP aS PRE-
‘LQUSLY SOHEDULED FOR A. WRITTEN STATEMENT ~ MISS AMGS INDICATED lad SHE HAD
36! EEN DETAINED AT. WORK BUT SHE WOULD CORE IN TOMORRGU APTERNOOR R & STATEMENT.
| SHE SAID SHE RIGHT SHOW UP AS EARLY AS 42 NOON. Lt
48 co ITACTED RONALD HUBBARD WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE FOR SAFEWAY WHO WAS NOT INTERVIEW
“AT THE. SCENE.HE LIVES AT. 4454 DIPLOMAT WAY .PHS 447-4276.HE STATED THAT HE HA
> GONE Into THE PARKING T. OF. THE STORE TO COLLECT SHOPPING CARTS.HE NOTICED - é
i #58, 420- “430. LBS, SHORT AFRO -HAIR> CLEAN SHAVEN, WEARIN'
= CO
a ae
Te Se
| ANTTE BLAZER’ JACKET AND BLACK SLACKS.THIS MAN WAS STANDING BY. A CONT
NEAR THE NE CORNER OF THE FRONT OF THE STGRE.THE MAN DID NST WANT HI
. ekennnen see RERHR KKH ce teteeeeegs
INCIDENT NO. @252@7834 FENSE REPORT ‘ PAGE 2.049
KEKE ELE KK EK HK KKK ERE ERK ERE D petal ROKER EERE
FACE AS HE KEPT DUCKING BEH THE POST -WHEN HUBBARD LL@MED HIS WAY.AS HUBBARD W
a$ GOING INSIDE THE FRONT DGOR-HE HEARD A SHOF AND TURNED -T6 SEE “THE SUSPECT - “se
WITH @ LONG BARRLED REVOLVER IN HIS HAND.HE NOTICED THE COMP WAS SHCT AND ASK ING
FOR HELP AS HE CCOMP 3 RAN TG THE DOGR.THE SUSPECT STARTED TOWARD THE SIDE GF TH
— STORE AND HUBBARD WENT .INGSEDE’ THE STORE TO HAVE AN AMBULANCE CALLED. HUBBARD
SAID HE MAY BE ABLE TQ RECGGNIZE THE SUSPECT AND IS WILLING TO DG A COMPOSIT
DRAWING OF THe. SUSPECT HE SAW.HE WILL: CALL -TOMORRGW TO SET ‘UP AN APPOINTMENT FS
THE COMPOSIT,AND A WRITEN “STATENENT. tet . GoM
WE RECEIVED A CALL FROM RONALD HOWROE “ALLEN. 784 UCLAN® ,BURBANK CALIF, 243-Sé
6. HE SAID THAT HE WAS IN HOUSTON SINCE S-4-84 FOR A POCKET BILLIARDS TOURK
AT THE WOODLANDS. HE RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE COMP WHD IS -A GOOD FRIEND AFTER
ARRIVING IN HOUSTON.THE COMP TOLD Hin HE WAS LEAVING HIS- WIFE AND HE WANTED To -
VISIT WITH HIM IN HOUSTON FGR. A FEW GAYS.THE COMP DROVE TO HOUSTON AND STAYED
IN THE ROOM -AT THE BEST WESTERN WITH ALLEN.LAST NIGHT S-42-@4 THE CONF DROVE.
ALLEN TO THE AIRPORT AT 6:6@PM FOR A 7:23@Pm FLIGHT TO LAS VEGAS.THIS WAS THE LA
T TIME ALLEN SAW THE COMP ALIVE.IT WAS HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CORP WAS GOING
TO CHECK GUT GF THE MOTEL ROOM IN THE MORNING OF S- 44-8 47 AND ORIVE TO. EITHER -
OKLA OR KENTUCKY TO VISIT A SGN.ALLEN HAS TALKED TO LORRETTA LAMSERT WHO. SAID: TH
E— CORP WAS DRIVING. TO SEE HER AFTER THEY HAD A FIGHT ON THE- Tee ague LAST. NISHE
»FROM LONG DISTANCE RECORDS THe COWP CALLED LORETTA LAMBERT JUST BEFORE “CHECKING
OUT GF THE MOTEL.ALLEN SAYS THE COMP HAD LEFT HIS WIFE AND HAD ALL HIS PESESSION
§ WITH-HIM IN HIS VAN. HE SAID THE CGrP HAD SEVERAL THOUSAND pee a “CASH-
CHE THOUGHT ABOUT 5,@@3 OOLLARSJ.WHILE ALLEN AND THE COMP- WERE“ TOGE R_ HERE
THEY PLAYED SEVERAL GAHES OF. GOLF AND WENT FISHING. AT NG TIME DID EITHER HAVE -
ANY DEALINGS WITH A BLACK MALE AND ALLEN SAYS IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT THE -.
COnF WOULD HAVE’ ANYTHING TG DO WITH BLACKS.HE- SAYS THE CONP DIS NOT HAVE A KEY
RING AND KEPT & SINGLE VAN KEY AND MOTEL KEY LOOSE IN HIE POCKET.
Seta Sania
WE RECEIVED A CALL FROM SALLY HERLERP WHO CLAIMS TG:BE- THE GNi
COHP.SHE LIVES AT 4226 29TH ST IN ASHLAND KY.SHE CLAIHS THAT S
IF THE COMP WAS MARRIED TG LORETTA LARBERT AND SHE HAS NEVER Net f
CONCERNED THAT THe COMPS SONS ANG DAUGHTERS FAY NOT GET THe COMPS Pas SIONS | :
WHICH SHE FEELS THEY DESERVE.THE CORP HAS CHILDREN IN FLORIDA NAD -KEXTUCKY AND A
N X-WIFE, DOROTHY’ JIN ASHLANG.SHE WAS ADVISED THAT LORETTA WOULD BE ABLE TO CLAIM
THE CGAPS PGSESSIONS HERE WITH DOCUMENTS SHOWING SHE WAS MARRIED TC THE. COMP.IF -
THERE IS A DISPUTE WITH LGRETTA ABGUT THE POSESSIONS.IT SHOULD BE HANDLED THROUG
BAN ATTORNEY... : nN * = & & : —
DETECTIVE ELLIS CONTACTED LORETTA LAMBERT AT 662-884-3438, TUSCON ARI ZONA.LORETTA
LIVES AT THE SAME ADDRESS &5 SHOWN-ON SOME OF THE COMPS PERSGNAL PAPERS FROM HIE
VAN.SHE BOS ADVISED THAT THE PGLICE-COULD RELEASE THE VAN AND PERSONAL POSESSICN
OF THE Con? TO HER WITH PROPER DOCUMENTATION ON HER MARRIAGE TO THE CORP .SHE WAS
TOLD THE VAN WOULD NOT BE HELD AS EVIDENCE IN THE CASE AND WHEN SHE CANc TG PICK
IT UP THERE WOULD BE A, TOWING AND STORAGE CHARGE.THE MORGUE WAS CONTACTED AND -
ADVISED NOT TG RELEASE THE COMPLAINANTS AGNEY WITH OUT -PROFF oF NEXT. OF KI .
ELLIS TRiEl ie CONTACT SGT GALLAN OF THE PIMA CO §.0.,ARIZONG,T TO LET HIM KNOW
WE HAD BEEN OUCH WITH “THE D.E.A. AND THAT THERE WAS NG EVIDENCE- THAT THE
COP. WAS aILLED BECAUSE OF DRUG RELATED DEALINGS.HE WAS ALSO ADVISED THAT THE -
COHFS SERIAL NUMBERS ON-THE MONEY CARRIED BY THE COMP HAD -BEEN CHECKED ON’ NCIC
WITH, -OUT..A HIT ON STOLEN. GALLAN WAS NOT IN HIS OFFICE AND A: ESSAGE WAS LEFT
TH THE. INFORMATION -GALLAN WAS REQUESTED TQ CALL IF HE ‘NEEDED FURTHER INFORMAT
N-ON THE COMP.
he ek
ba —_ 7 Fe. _ : Ip
EXER EER RRR RR Rr
“NCIDENT-NO. B2S207G84. .
EERE RELA EE EMRE RR ER EERE ES?
jupPLENENT ENTEREC BY =. 42332 °
OFFENSE REPORT - : PAGE 2.847
SRE REE KEEN EERIE > suum
w-Oe87 —_ Peg |
IF FENSE- CAPITAL MURDER a ; oo
STREET LOCATION INFORMATION © 00 +:
IUNBER- 8935 NAHE-NORTH - FYPE-FWY —. SUFFIX- i
JATE OF OFFENSE-@5/43/84 | a DATE OF “SUPPLERENT-@5/485/84- 0 °°
SOMPLESI LAST-LAMBERT FIRST—BOBBY sMIDDLE=GRANT a
5 i RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION . 5
NONE : We
IFFICER4~D. i AUTREY -- ». ~ enpa—aaea76 SHIFT-4 DIV/STATION-HONICIDE
, “SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE <6 -7-~
PROGRESS REPORT: |! oo
1 DET. AUTREY ASGIGNED TO CONTINUE THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE ABQVE CASE
REET WITH-BERNADINE. SKILLERN THIS MORNINGS IN THE HOMICIDE OFFICE- WHERE SHE. -
AGREED TG DO A CONPOSIT-OF WHAT SHE -RERENBERED THE SUSPECT LOOKING LOOK.
DET. -RASCOE DID THE COMPGSIT FOR THE WITNESS USING’ THE FOLLOWING COMPGSIT
CARDS. ; —
FACIAL TONE: F445... 2 # y
NOSE: NO -2 - : vs : :
LIPS: L 3 -4 . oo. . .
EYES: E S58 -2
CHIN: C 26 -2
HAIR: H 434 42,
COMPOSIT WILL BE PLACED WITH THE FOLDER - aNd- THIS CASE. THE -WITH ESS RRS.
SKILLE! C.-R RAYS IDAL-DECRIP TZ, SUSPECT AS BEING A: B.
“S 49 LBS. TAéLL AND SK AN SHAVER. AND A LI
ae THIS GATE ARS. WILHA AnOS CARE “INTO THE HOMICIDE, QFFICE AND GAVE A WRITTEN.
Re neo ne TG WHAT SHE SAW GN THE NIGHT OF THE SHOOTING. DUE TO KER SOB a
SHE WA! T ABLE TO STAY AND DG & CONPOSIT. HOWEVER SHE SAID MONDAY WAS A SLOW. od
DAY ar uoaK ‘AND SHE WOULD TRY TO CORE IN SONETIFE MONDAY AND DO & COMFOSIT.
DET — RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT THE DAUGHTER OF AIRS. “FIGISES. MOLINA WHG LIVES
AT 245@ WINTER BAY LANE » 448-6729 WHICH-TS ABOUT-A MILE TO A RILE AND A HALF.
FROM THE SAFEWAY STORE, HAS INFFORMATION ABOUT A POSSABLE SUSPECT. MRS. FOISES’ s
DAUGHTER WHO IS TWELVE YEARS OLD TOLD HER THERE WAS-A B/N FITTING THE SAME - “a
DESCRIPTION OF THE WANTED SUSPECT WHO-LIVES ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET-
as THER AND SHE THINKS IN -THE SAKE BLOCK. SHE DOESN’T KNOW THE ADDRESS: BUT
| SAID HER DAUGHTER COULD POINT THe HOUSE OUT. I. ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT THE MRS. me
MOISES GR ANY ONE ar. THEER HORE BUT FOUND’ NO ONE THERE.
|
i
|
KKK HE KEK IRENE KH RRR ERR EH Se ee i ee
INCIDENT NO. 825287654. OFFENSE REPORT - - i. ¥ ; PASE 2.026
EHR E REE REE EKER REE ERE REN REIKI RH KKH shaetehieiseianiieidnge lagna
F : ‘
gUP PLEMENT ENTERED BY = 38476" .
NO-8286 . ;
OFFENSE- ‘CAPITAL MURDER _ —_ :
: STREET LOCATION INFORMATEON ~ . - . s
NUMBER- 8935 NAMNE-NORTH . "" TYPE-FWY - SUFFIX- © ‘
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/ 13/84 oo DATE OF SUPPLEMENT-OS/45/84
COHPLCS) LAST-LAMBERT :_ FIRST-BO8BY |. - MIDDLE-GRANT
_- RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION -
NONE :
OFFICERA-J-W-ELLIS. -°. ENPH-B34882 SHIFT=2 DIV/STATION-HOMICIDE -
OFFICERZ— W.W.OUEN EMPR-242332 SHIFT-2- ;
. - SUPPLERENT NARRATIVE 2 3 -
_— : j .
:
i
MARAAARAARAAAAAAARAAAAAAMEROGRESS. | REPORT S- ASatsassnanennnnannnannnnsananannd
2
WE, DETECTIVES ELLIS: AND GWEN a CONTINUED. THE INVESTIGATION OF ‘THIS CASE . ae
RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT @ HAS.NGLINA “AND HER 42 YEAR. OLD DAUGHTER a A HAD-!
BEEN AT THE SCENE OF THIS OFFENSE ON WEDNESDAY,S-43-84, AT APPROXIMATELY 4s wernt
»THEY WERE ADVISED BY A WRECKER DRIVER THAT THE STORE WAS CLOSED Du! ro & HOLSUR
-THE DRIVER: fee ON TO DESCRIBE THE SUSPECT TO -THE-FIQLINA‘’S-. E
p OE Teles ae BBS.wOL INA’ ‘S DAUGHTER, LISA, INDICAT!
ers VE ED NcaR THER FBS MOLINA DECIDED TO NOTIFY THE
Ik TALKING WITH HRS ROLINA ¥ WE LEARNED THAT HER DAUGHTER MAS. VISITING HER ekano—?
PARENTS TONIGHT BUT WOULD” RETURN Hofic AFTER 46:84F".WE ADVISED HER THAT WE 3
WOULD LIKE ‘TO SPEAK WITH HER DAUSKTER AND WOULD RE-CONTACT: HER. . :
DETECTIVE, NULL RELAYED INFORMATIGN SHE™ HAD. RECEIVED A CALL FROM & MRS CROWE, *
PHE 442-5447. HRS CROWE TOLD NULL SHE HEARD THE NEWS ABOUT T = SAFEWAY INCIDENT ~
AND WANTED TO GIVE US SOME INFGRMATICN.SHE SAID THAT LAST JUNE GR SULY SHE WAS
CHASED BY A TALL THIN BLAGK KALE WHO SHE SAW BREAKING INTO THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR.
TO HER.SHE FELT.THIS RAN MATCHED THE DESCRIPTION GF THE SUSPECT IN THIS CASE
AND S FELT HE LIVED IN HER SUBDIVISION WHICH IS FAIRGREEN SUBDIVISION OFF
ALBINE MAIL RT. A COUNTY REPORT WAS RADE CONCERNING THE BURGLARY SHE SPOXE -OF.
DEA AGENT REL ASHTON FROM OKLAKOGHA CALLER AND ADVISED THAT HE KAD RE =D INEOR
ATION THROUGH AN INFORMANT THAT -THE COMPLAINANT AND RON -ALLEX WERE IN HOUSTON .
U-FOR & BILLARDS TOURNAMENT AT THE WOODLANOS.HE COULD NOT ADD FURTHER INFORMATIGN.
i i : “ _
SUPPLERENT ENTERED BY = 34688 ~~ pe FG
PAGE 2. e245
FOO OI RI ION alas © HEX
INCIDENT .NO. e@2sza7e01 @ roe “OFFENSE REPORT
aki eal Ie sail:
No-@809,
oF PENSE" CAPITAL iuRDER
: : "STREET, LOCATION INFORMATION - ;
NUNBER- 8935 NAME-NORTH ° 7 7+ FYPE-FUY SUFFIX-
q
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/43/84 .- . DATE OF SUPPLEMENT-85/ 19/84 3
sORPECSS LAST-LAMBERT- : FIRST-BoBBY. 2-7) MIDDLE-GRANT - : :
: . RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION . ° 4
NONE “4
z
aE ARES DW. AUTREY oe EMPR-@3047¢- SHIET~4 DIV/STATION- HGHICID
adhe
ae Se SUPFLENENT NARRATIVE ~ avin te
>ROGRESS REPORT:
dE: DETECTIVES AUTREY. AND cook ASSIGNED To CONTINUE THE: INVESTIGATION INTO THE
ABOVE CASE.RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT A WILMA HUKES WHO-WGRKS FOR THE TEA CAT
NURSERY AT 764S CROFTOK . 635-2786 . HAD INFORMATION ABOUT THE SUSPECT IN THIS. -
CASE. WE CALLED HRS. NUKES AND ASKED.~HER WHAT INFORMATION SHE HAD ABOUT THE
SUSPECT. SHE TOLD US HER SISTER , FLORENCE HE DONALD-.€ 626 GRENSHAL , ‘445-7
4AS_IN THE SAFEWAY STORE THE NIGHT THE SHOOTING QCCURED. .SHE WERT GN TG-SAY
THAT HER SGN JAMES MUXES N/F-7 WAS IN HER SISTERS CAR ALONG WITH HER SISTERS
TWO-SGNS . ALFONSO AC DONALD N/M 4@°AND LE OTIS WILKERSGR N/M 42 WI THE = W
SHOOTING OCCURED AND THEY WITNESSED IT. SHE SAID HER SON AND HER SISTERS TWO #4
30YS WERE IN HER SISTERS STATION WAGON WHEN THE SHOOTING HAPPENED AND THE BOYS
3AW THE RAN THAT DID -THE SHOOTING AND RECONIZED HIF “AS BEING A MAN THEY HAVE ¢
3EEN ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AT THE HOUSE ACROSS -THE STREET FROM THE MC, DGNALD
VESIDENCE . .
4ER UHAT aie KNEW ABOUT THE CASE. SHE FOLD HE SHE WAS IN
THE SHOOTING OCCURED AND THAT THE THREE BOYS WERE IN. THE
THE FAN DGING THE SHOOTING AS BEING A NAN THEY HAVE- SEEN
YIRECTLY ACROSS THE ae FROH HER HOUSE. : THE CRISS & CROSS SHE
-IVING AT 827. GRENSH 1 448-9498 3. .
IRS... FC apotaee oot IT Was ai DAY OR SO. AFTER THE suea TING _THeT ThE BCYS WERE"
ACCORDING TO THE BOYS THE MAN’ TOOK OFF RUNNING. SHE WENT ON To Say
I3ELEIVED IT WAS HONADY. MORNING THE BOYS VENT DOWN TO THE CORNER - TO. c&TCH THE
3US TO GO TO.SCHOGL AND THEY SAW THE SANE FAN WAITING ON THE CORNER. Has...
jc DONALD SAID THE | BOYS CAME RUNRING | BACK TO THE HOUSE AFTER SEEING THEN M&N.
“ARS. ‘NC DONAL SAID SHE BELEIVED THE NAN THE BOYS. WERE TALKING ‘ABOUT: WAS SEEING
INE OF ‘ARS. BROWNS DAUGHTERS. . .
JE DROVE TO.827 “GRENSHAW WHERE WE TALKED WITH MRS:-BROWN IN REGUARSS TG A
(4M FITTING THE DISCRIPTION OF THE- WANTED SUSPECT IN THIS CASE. S
“saunp DED-LIKE CURLY SCOTT: SHE WENT GN TG SAY CURLY HAD GOT HER DAL
JUDY PREGNANT AND SUIT COMRNG AROUND KUCH AFTER THE BABY WAS -BOR
CJODYS PAYDAY AND THAT WAS. TG GET .NGNEY FROM HER. FIRS. BR
\T 7339 PHILIPS OFF LITTLE YORK JUST A LITTLE PAST UEST-
DESCRIBED CURLY AS BEING TALL AND SKINNEY WITH NQ ‘FACIAL
iE. TOLD. HER HE USED TG WORK AS 4 SECURITY Guar. oo
HAIR. 5:
SAATDENT-NO. B2eoevOn1 Wy OFFENSE acpaaT @bae AN NAR RA ARR RR TEN RK:
INCIDENT*NO. 625267084 OFFENSE REPORT ~~ ee 2b ’ PASE 2.e22
RIT EEN EN IERE EN EREREES FORE TITHE IRIE SESE Renae
fIRS- BROWN: DESCRIBED. THE CAR OF cURLYS AS. BEING @ 70 TO -74- CHEVY FOUR boar
solid BAIGE POSSABLE a TAPE Be. i 7
NOTE: HRS. KC DONALD DESCRIBED THE. SUSPECTS CAR AS - BETKE 4! = 7G 78 CHEVY 5 ee
LIGHT BAIGE oR BROWN. - g ~
NOTE’ CORRECTION: “THE NAME OF MRS. SUDY BROWNS DAUGHTER: 45 NOT. guy BUT DIANE
PERRY AND SHE WORKS AT THE WILLOW RUN DAY iGARE NURSERY. SHE: ‘ES. THE ONE- THAT RAD
THE BABY BY CURLY SCOTT.
SUPPLEMENT ENTERED BY = . 38476 a
NO-@8 4G
‘OFFENSE- CAPITAL MURDER ; a ‘
eee STREET LOCATION INFORMATION - _
8935 NAME-NORTH . oe TYPE-FuY - SUFFIX-
NUP
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/ 43/54 . . ‘DATE OF SUPPLEMENT-85/19/84
CONFLOS3 LAST-LANEERT ° . FIRST-BOBEY = - MIDDLE-GRANT -~
" RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION
” NONE ; . 7 : . i ;
OFFICER(4-De cOOK |” - EMPE-54627 SHIFT—4 DIV/STATION-HON
SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE -
_DETS COOK AND AUTREY CONTINUED INVESTIGATION ON THIS -CASE..DETS FOUND
CURLEY SCOTT TO HAVE A RAP UNDER HPD ID 8267648 WITH DOB 448845. SCOTT
SHOWS SEVERAL ARRESTS FOR. CARRYING A PISTOL ‘AND DWI: SCOTT HAS A -TDL UNDER ©
862744968 WITH ADDRESS LISTING 2798 WTC JESTER 872. TOL HISTORY SHOWED A,
TORY. SUSPENSIGN ON SCOTT’S TDL WITH DWI -ARREST ON 444479. DET voor
CTED THE D.A. CENTRAL INTAKE -TO CHECK’ FGR PROBATION STATUS ON SCOTT.
INTAKE, ADVISED CAND WAS CONFIRMED BY POWERES: WITH HCSG FUBITIVE Garnext:
THAT CURLEY SCOTT WAS WANTED ON AN OUTSTANDING CAPIAS Néaee4S CBOND FORFEITURE ~
FOR DWLS3 OUT OF CCCL 4S ISSUED GN 632784, BOND $25@4.8@.-HCSQ ADVISED a a
THEY SHOWED SEVERAL JP WARRANTS OUT OF CONSTASLE RANKIN'’S OFFICE WHICH ARE NOT
CURRENT. DET COSK CONTACTED CONSTABLE RANKIN’S OFFICE: ANG SPOKE TO Der. WINGO
WHO ADVISED THAT HE HAG SEVERAL “WARRANTS OF -SCOTT- THAT WERE DISMISSED. DEP.
WINGO ADVISED DET THAT HE DID ‘HAVE SEVERAL ADDRESSES ON SCOTT. -
THE ADDRESSES DEP WINGO HAD BEGINNING WITH THE MOST RECENT: WEREs -
7337 PHILLIPS CAS OF DECEMBER, $480) : -
68438 GLENBOURNEY . . E : .
! 2446 WALL . CON-HFD RAF SHEET) » 5 .
| 2794 WT C JESTER C ON TDL HISTORY) :
~—DER-WINGO ALSO ADVISED HE HAD A PUBLIC SERVICE ‘LISTING FOR. SCOTT AT 45 Bhs °
THES INFORMATION. QSTAINED BY NANE, Does AND -HCSO SPIN HESZAG494.
REE K EERE RRR RRR ER SRK K ERK RKKKKRRKK ER RRR teihehabebebenenaieleteteteieleiteteteereee
NCIDENT NG. 62528768 4 ; OFFENSE REPORT: ~~ >
4 HRRHE KKK K KK KEKE RHEE, slelelehtieleted ctatat st ettalettotatiat) eee .
ISCROSSED THIS PS % AND FOUND iT. LISTED TO A DEBEIE S GREEN, 244@-WAlL. -
ETS ¢ :
ET COOK CONTACTED SOUTHWESTERN BELL NF ORRATION AND FOUND -THIS NUMBER LISTED, :
Q DEBBIE S- “GREEN, NOW OF 7339 PHILLIPS. 2S
eT COOK CHECKED SS24 AND SPOKE WITH BOULET WHO ADVISED THIS SUBJECT WAS, CLEAR.”
HOTO LAS IS PREPARING EBLBE PRINTS ON SERET FOR A RHGTG SPREAD. . 4
UPPLERENT ENTERED ‘BY = $1627.
(eee oe “- a ee — re a
10-8244 . : -
JFFENSE- CAPITAL MURDER - .
oF ’ STREET LOCATION INFORMATION * ; .
{UNBER- 8935 NAME-NORTH , =~ + TYPE-FWY. - ‘SUFFIX-
ATE GF ae eesaae a? . * DATE OF SUPPLEMERT-8S/ 49/84
TORPLOS3 LAST “LAMBERT FIRST-s085Y ~ MIDDLE-GRANT -
* RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION WE om
ONE .
IFFICER4-DC COOK . - ERP3-854627 SHIFT— fe BIVZSTATIONS Hom ¢
: ; _ SUPPLERENT NARRATIVE
JETS COOK AND AUTREY, WERE IN THE HOMICIOE OFFICE UHEN LORETTA LAMBERT, -WIFE ™
OF THE COMPL CANE IN’ TO OBTAIN A RELEASE FOR THE ‘COMPLAINANTS VEHICLE. .
VEH WAS RELEASED TO HER AND. A FRED THOMAS WHO WILL’ BE DRIVING THE VEHICLE. 3.
SUPPLEHENT ENTERED BY = S4627
OFFENSE- CAPITAL MURDER ~
STREET LOCATION INFORMATION -
NUMBER 893S NARE-NORT! - TYPE-FWY - SUFFIX- gen |
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/43/84° wanes * DATE. OF SUPPLEMENT-@S/ 49/84 “
COHPLCS) LAST-LANBERT FIRST-BOBBY - - MIDDLE-GRANT Te
| As : “RECOVERED STOLEN, VEHICLES INFORMATION:
| NONE ;
| OFFICER(-D.D. SMITH _ ENPH-864569 ‘SHIFT-: - DIV/STATION-
vs SUPPLEWENT NARRATIVE °-.. -
UNKRGUN
L8i-3645
‘ ra
7 4984, DETECTIVE D.W. AUTREY, BADGE 8D+700, SUBMITTED TO THIS ¢
OIL AND @ BASGIE CONTAINING PLANT SUBSTANCE AND A PACKAGE CF CIaSA
ZI
CRE EN KER ERR R RRR EERE RE RE me RK K KER RK RK REE EK ENKI EK ab oleedce)
INCIDENT NG. @25287094 . GFFENSE REPORT” votes - Boe
bere nr bert i rrrrre ne alalelalelelelehslahetahelahedslahisidieiaisian JOKER SER eee
. PAPERS ait ; pili
APPROXIMATELY 3.4 GRAHS OF MARIHUANA ERE DETECTED IN THE- FOIL AND BAGGIE ”
SUBNITTED. ‘
DDR a : ; Lo.
SUPPLEMENT ENTERED BY = 74454
NO-66 13
OF FENSE- CAPITAL RURDER A
° STREET LOCATION INFORMATION 2 . .
NUMBER~ "| 8935 NAHE-NORTH =~ TYPE-FUY, — SUFFIX- 7.
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/ 13/24 DATE OF SUPPLERENT-05/49/84 |
CONPLCS) LAST-LANBERT " FIRST-BGEBY |... HIDDLE-GRANT.
‘RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION © ~*~
‘NONE : : . :
OFFICER (-J-W-ELLIS __ ENPH-@94888 SHIFT-2 DIV/STATIGN-HOMICIDE
OFFICERZ=U.M.OUEN EWFH-G42332 SHIFT-2 =
- "+> SUPPLEWENT NARRATIVE
PROGRESS REPORT S-4P-Q4AAAAA AA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMAAAARAARAARAAARAAAA
‘WE,JELLIS AND OWEN CONTINUES THE INVESTIGATION OF THIS CASE.
WAVING OBTAINED INFORHATION FROM DETS A@UTRY AND COCK GN THE POSSISLE SUSPECT.
CURLEY SCOTT, We GBTAINED COLGR FHCTGS GF SCOTT AND FOUR” (43. FILL IN PROTOS
7G PROVIDE A PHOTG LINE UP FOR WITNESS VIEWING.
ren
WE FIRST WEN NT TO THE SAFEWAY STGRE WHERE
RONALD HU BAR HUBBARD S@ID THAT HE WAS ABLE TO" REC
OT TRE COMPLAINANT FROM THE PHOTG SPAEAD.HE STATED SUSPECT
ECTED AND NGNZ OF THE PEOPLE HE SAW IN THE PHOTGS WERE DARK EN
COmPGSIT PHOTG MADE EY RS SKILLERN AND BTTED THAT THES WAS A FAIR
NESS GF THE SUSPECT RE Shs AT Tie SCENE.
A
AT THE SAFEWAY STORE ue TALKED: TG DEBRA NIXON WHO IS AN E
R DUTY THE NIGHT OF THE OFFENSE AND NOT PREVIOUSLY INTERV
a SECOND NIGHT SHE WORKED AT THE STORE AND SHE WAS IN THE cGuaTEsY BS
= HEARD-SHERIAN ELUK SAY THE MAN HAO BEEN SHOT. RS SAT sTooo 0
IN THE BOSTH-IN GROER TG SEE OVER THE BOOTH TWO WAY GLASS AND GET A
F THE PARKING LOT.SHE SAID SHE WAS ABLE TO SEE THE SUSPECT WALKING FROA R
GF THE SHOOTING BUT CGULD NOT SEE HIS FACE.SHE WAS ONLY ABLE TG SE k
WEARING A WHITE JACKET, AND WOULD NGT BE ABLE TC RECOGNIZE T =
AT THE PHOTG LINE. UP AND SAID THAT SINCE SHE HAD JUST STA’
A STORE SHE COULD NOT REN 3 ANY OF THE eee ee Th TH
— STORE EITHER GN THE NIGHT OF GR PREVIOUS TC -7
EKEE ER ERE KEE RHEE Cee Ce ake
INCIDENT NO. 825287684 OFFENSE REPORT PASE 2.625 -
ERA IE HIE IE RR EHS iat salalalladateheioioirioisieisielsloleigiel Dc
WE TALKED TO SHERIAN ELUK ON THE PHONE: WHILE - AT THE STORE AND FOUND THAT SHE WAS:
Ore DUTY THIS NIGHT -AND HAD MADE «PREVIOUS © APPOINTMENTS -SHE-STATED SHE-LIVED -CiGs:
= TG THE CENTRAL POLICE STATION ANG WOULD LIKE TO COME IN THE MORNINS TO THE =~
HOMICIDE OFFICE TG VIEW THE PHOTOG LINE UP.SHE WAS GIVEN DETECTIVES AUTRY AND CCO4
KS NAMES AND WILL CALL THEM TONORRGW TO-RAKE AN-APPOINTMENT TO VIEW THE PHOTAS. §{
WE-TALKED TO HARY GONZALEZ WHO DID NOT SEE THE SUSPECT.SHE-DID LOOK THROUGH THE -
PHOTO LINE UP AND COULD NOT RECOGNIZE ANY OF THE PHOTOS AS BEING CUSTOMERS oF ."
THE STORE.SHE LOQKED. THROUGH CUSTORER FILES AND GOULD NOT-FIWD @ FILE ON” - j
CURLEY SCOTT. - - # q
LEAVING THE SATEWAY STORE. WE WENT TG THE B16 TEX BOWLING: ALLEY ‘AT LITTLE YORK “ANE
D THE NORTH FREEWAY WHERE We FOUND ‘THE. WITNESS BERNADINE SKILLERN-SHE LOOKED ATS
THE PHOTOS WE HAD AND COULD NOT RECOGNIZ E ANY OF THE PERSONS PICTURED AS BEING =4)
THE SUSPECT IN THIS’ CASE. . _ - . : :
WE WENT. TO THE RESIDENCE OF. WILMA AMOS aND AFTER LOOKING/AT THE PHOTO"LINE UP ~
SHE COULD NOT RECOGNIZE ANY OF SUSFECT IN THE LINE UP.IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT
MRS ANGS. AT THIS TIRE SEERS TO BE VERY ‘UNCO-OPERATIVE CONCERNING THE INVESTIGATE
On. oo 2 ee . : %
. _ . “a
WE WERE UNABLE TO CONTACT WITNESS DANIEL GRADY TO RAVE HIR -VIEW THE PHOTOS,
WE CALLED FLORENCE rCOONAL LD AT HER RESIDENCE -AND ASKED IF°WE COULD CONE TO-HER #
ONE TO HAVE HER SONS LOOK AT THE PHOTOG LINE UP.SHE STATED THAT NCE THE SUSPECT
WAS & VISITOR TO THE BROWN HORE ACROSS THE STREET FROM HER -HOUSE SHE WOULD RATHE
R BRING HER SONS TG THE HORICIDE OFFICE Tork AFTER SCHOOL TC LOOK AT PHOTOSE
We WENT TO THE-827 GRENSHAY WHERE WE TALKED TO. YRS “SUDY. BROWN AND KER DAUGHTER. -3
DIANE PERRY.THEY BOTH STATED THAT THE PHOTO WE -HAD WAS A PHOTO GF CURLEY SCOTT
WHO IS THE FATHER GF DIANE PERRY’S. CHILD.THEY IDENTIFIED THE PHCTO OF HPDE ans
287648 AS BEING THE CURLEY SCOTT THEY KnEW.DIANE STATED THAT THE LAST TINE SHE
_ SAW CURLEY WAS LAST FRIDAY .5-45-84.THAT EVENING SCOTT CAME TO HER HOUSE AND -
PICKED UP DIANE AND THE BABY §Nv TOGK HER TO HIS MOTHERS -HOUSE AT 7339 PHILLIFS~
WHERE THEY SPENT THE NIGHT.SHE SAYS THAT SCOTT IS. THE FATHER OF HE R CHILD AND:
NOT COME ARGUND VERY RUCH WE SHOWED US A PHOTO CEX4@3-OF seat IN WEICH
IS SKIN DOES APPEAR DARKER THAN IN ‘THE ID -PHOTO WE HAVE.SCOTT DGES NOT GWK A
CAR AND WAS DRIVING A BROWN CHEVROLET BELONGING io A RELATIVE. HE IS SUPPOSED TO:
BE. Wd: NG AT AN UNKNOWN CONSTRUCTION JOB, - a
LEAVING THE BROWN RESIDENCE WE WERE FCLLOUED INTO-THE YARD BY FIRS GUDY BROUN. SHE
TOLD US THAT HER DAUGHTER DIANE WAS SENZ-RETARDED, CDIANE- DID NOT APPEAR TO DETEC
TIVES TO BE SLOW GR RETARDEDJAND THAT DIANE WAS NO® VISITED BY “SCOTT UNLESS SHE.
HAS BEEN PAID AND HE CGULD GET MONEY -FROM HER.RRS BROWN SAIB THAT HE HAG NOT: ”
TAKEN CARE-OF ANY. OF DIANE’S EXPENSES WITH THE :PREGNANCY OR THE BABY SINCE HE uA
S BORN.RRS BROWN FURTHER STATED THAT -A WOMAN WHO SCOTT-WAS LIVING WITH WAS NANEC
MILDRED GALLOWAY AND MILDRED KILLED HER BROTHER ABOUT TWO -YEARS AGG GN LUCKY ST.
RS BROWN SAID.SHE WOULD CALL DETECTIVES IF SCOTT-SHOWED UP. AT HER “HU =. AGAIN...
SHE STATED THAT SHE DID NOT KNOW iF DIANE-WOULD TELL: SCOTT DETECTIVES HAD BEEN
___10, SEE HER CONCERNING THIS CASE. Ti SHOULD BE NOTED. THAT MRS BROWN HAS SEVERAL
(CHILDREN LIVING AT HER HOUSE’ AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT -CURLEY SCOT? IS ThE
PERSON SEEN BY THE HCDONALD CHILDREN AT THE SCENE AND AT: THE BROWN RESIDENCE «
THE MCDONALDS ARE COMING IN TORORRGW TO VIEW PHSTOS -OF aH SUSFECT.
fcioent nos esezereas’ @). Sp orrense ncront y RRRRERRR ANTENA RAR Ann
‘NCIDENT NG. 825287834 — OFFENSE. REPORT Sa - :
HEARERS EREERS ERE ARER REET ES slalaiatelatishelsiaietstatatateloteteielaa 9 IEE FEE HEHE HIDE IE EO EE HEE
. i a .
SUPPLEMENT ENTERED BY = 34888 '
yo-0a44 | a baa oe
OFFENSES CART LAL "HURDER
: : STREET LOCATION INFORMATION Bes
NUPIBER- 8935 NAHE-NORTH - -TYPE-FUWY- -- SUFFIX- ~~
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/ 13/84 ‘DATE oF SUPPLENENT-85/26/84-
com iPLESI LAST-LANBERT ~ ” FIRST- BOBBY. ©°- -MIDDLE-GRANT
E . "RECOVERED ‘STPLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION... *
NONE. g
OFFICER 4- DC cook . ENPa-@5 1627 SHIFT-4 DIV/STATION-HOM
SUF FLEPENT :-NARRATIVE*
SHERIAN ELUK, & UITRESS IN THIS CASE CARE. TO THE “HOMECIDE. OFFICE-ASOUT 9: Ban:
TG VIEW A-PHOTG SPREAD OF THE SUSPECT IN THIS CASE.- DETS- AUTREY~AND COOK SHOWED
MS. ELUK & PHOTO: ‘ARRAY COMPOSED OF HPD ID B’S:. 2@764@ CSUSPECT SCOTT}, 342938 n4
227868, 204792,354537. MS. ELUK COULD NOT MAKE -A POSITIVE ID FROM THE PHOTOS. ‘SHE
DID SAY THE- SUSPECT’ S FACIAL FEATURES RESEMBLED &26761@ BUT SAID THE. SUSPECT ~~~}
WAS SUCH KORE NEAT LOOKING THAN IN THE PHOTO AND DID-NOT BELIEVE- THIS WAS THE ~
SUSPECT. MS. ELUK, LIKE OTHER WITNESSES. HAVE SAID ‘THE-SUSPECT- IN THIS CASE~. -
APPEARED NEAT AND CLEAN SHAVEN. THE PHOTO SPREAD REPRESENTS PICTURES OF SUSPECT
S WITH MOUSTACHE AND GOATEE AS THE CURRENT HPD-ID PHOTO QF SCOTT SHOWS HIM
WITH FACTAL HAIR. ‘ ps , E on a oa
-
8
SUPPLEMENT ENTERED BY = 54627
JOBE EGG a JIS ISR RI CTE TE Rn rag ieee
23S E IB IIEIEITEE:, FE AEE SEE IEE OIE EIT
0-88415
\FFENSE- CAPITAL MURDER |. ° ; a 9
Poe “+ STREET LOCATION INFORMATION ~~
{UHBER- - 8935 NARE-NORTH ~~. Lome es. TYPESPUY - “SUFFIX- =
YATE OF OFFENSE-@S/43/84 ... °° > > ‘DATE OF -SUPPLERENT-05/26/81
SONPLES3 LAST-LANBERT : FIRST-BOBBY- “—+r* =AIDDLE-GRANT ~
. - + RECOVERED STOLEN: VEHICLES INFORMATION
NONE : . .
IFFICER 4— se cook, rr - ENP 654627 SHIFT-4 DIV/STATION-HOM 2 =
SUPPLEMENT "NARRATIVE ee al
DET COOK LET THE CHILDREN VIEW THE.PICTURES AND BOTH STATED ‘THAT NONE
SAID THE MAN WAS CLEAN SHAVEN. THEY WERE ALSO SHOUN THE COMPOSITE PICTURE
MEN EMP#-842332 SHIFT-2
"SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE -
= ELLIS AND OWEN CONTINUED THE INVESTIGATION OF THIS CASE.
CTVIES HAD PREVIQUSLY RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM A BRE KER
_ HAT HE HAD OBSERVED TWO B/m’S IN A WHITE /BLUE PLYM GN STUBNE
| AND GULF BANK & SHORT TIME ‘AFTER THE OFFENSE OCCURRED. DRIVER SAT E WAS
“FOLLOWING THE CAR AND THE HALES INSIDE THE CAR WERE AC IN A SUSPETICUS
NCIDENT NO. 625287484 “(OFFENSE ‘REPORT oan > (oe EPAGE 2.627
JERI OGG
FLORENCE MACDONALD BROUGHT HER TWO CHILDREN. LEODIS. ‘CAGE 423-ANO ALFONSO. CAGE ae;
83 TO THE HOMICIDE OFFICE TO VIEW A PHOTO SPREAD OF THE SUSPECT.IN THIS CARE
PICTURES LOCKED LIKE THE MAN THEY SAW AT THE STORE OR ACROSS THE STREET. “THEY:
ise Ee, SRY
WHICH THEY SATO RESEMBLED THE SUSPECTS .-- : . a op
P aN
pe cook _ g° * oe SO, :
@52864 4:69PM. . . . a
SUPPLEHENT ENTERED BY =. 546277 - a _ . a
NO-6246
OFFENSE- CAPITAL MURDER ~~ ~
. STREET- LOCATION INFORMATION a
NUMBER— ‘8935 NANE-NORTH - *, TYPE-FUY © ~ SUFFIX---
DATe OF OFFENSE-@5/43/84 - DATE GF SUPPLEMENT-85/22/34
COMPLCS] LAST-LAMBERT -_FIRST-BOBEY “MIDDLE-GRANT
| . RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES ENFORMATION °° -
NONE ; : ;
OFFICER 4-3.W-ELLIS - EMP8-@3488% SHIFT-2 DIV/STATION-HOMICIDE
OFFICERZ-W.W.0 ae :
R DRIVER AT THE: SCE
AIRLINE .
RRRRTTE RAR AR ARE
INCID NO. @2526768% ° 4% OFFENSE REPORT
KER KK RRR K ER RARER KEKE RRR idedatalsdedadahedstatstodetoictoasaiatchstos
HANNER WHEN THE DRIVER OFT CAR NOTICED THE WRECKER
RAN A STGP SIGN AND LOST THE WRECKER. THE WRECKER DID
4. TEX KWTS3S FROM THE VEHICLE.REGISTRATION. ON THIS LICENSE cor - OA
72 PLYMOUTH 4DR TO A MARZELLA, SMITH, 884 MANSFIELD. IN THE ACRES HOMES: AREA OF”
TOWN WE WENT” BY THAT ADDRESS-AND FOUND THE HOUSE VACANT AND UP FOR SALE BY .
CENTURY 24 REALTY.THERE WAS NG LISTING IN THE CGRISS-CRSSS- FOR THE ADD
cout. FIND. NO DRIVERS LICENSE UNDER THE NAME OF HARZELLA “SM (ITH.
- ; PASE 2.825
RH K KKK MRKK KKK KL MKKEKKKHS |
SUPPLEMENT EN TERED BY = EER
NO-82 47
OFFENSE CAPITAL MURDER .-
a ae . STREET Location INFORMATEON = °°
NUNBER- "8935 NAME-NORTH ~ TYPESFUY - SUFFIX-
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/43/84 | DATE OF SUPPLEMERT-@5/24/84°
COMPLOS] LAST-LAMBERT FIRST-BOBBY MIDDLE-GRANT Ase:
RECOVERED STGLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION - ~
NONE . . :
GFFICER(-DC COOK °. 0 ENP @5 1627 ‘SHIFT—4 -DIV/STATION- Hor
ae Soe SUP PLERENT NARRATIVE <* a ee
DET COOK CHECKED WITH LATENT PRINT LAS TG SEE IF ANY PRINTS EAED
OFF THE PAPER GROCERY BAS COMPL WAS CARRYING WHICH SUSPECT MAY H TGUCHED.«
‘LEBLANS TH LATENT PRINTS. ADVISED THE BAG TAGSBED UNSER LE £487-84 WAS” es
‘EXARINED AND HAD NO IDENTIFIABLE PRINTS. - * a 8
2
a
“3
j
4
‘
4
Bod
NO-GEIG _ : Ce
OFFENSE- CaP ITAL MURDER
STREET LOCATION INFORMATI oN
SUFFIX-
| NUNBER- ‘8998 NAME-NORTH
_ DATE OF GFFENSE-@5/43/64° . DATE OF SUbrE TBS /24/8 4
| CGHPLCS3 LAST-LARBERT - FIRST-BOBEY MT
. RECOVERED STG LEN VEHICLES INFORMATION
. EMPH-a30476 SHIFT™4 DIV/STATION,
ERP S-65 4427- SHI FI~ Ae
CREE RRR AR ARR ne
INCIDENT NO. @25207a51 @
LEH EIR RE MIR RHEE RR RM! >]
“OFFENSE REPORT @ -PASE 2.e2¢9
HEH IER RHR > cin
oo ; cc.) SUPPLERENT- NARRATIVE: a 7
>ROGRESS REPORT: ° 2 bens os : : ,
4E "DETECTIVES cook AND ‘AUTREY ‘ASSIGNED TO CONTINUE THE INVEST SATION INTO THE: ¢
\BOVE CASE DROVE TO 8935S NORTH FREEWAY WHERE WE TALKED. WITH Ta ER AR. -
JOSKIN AND SHOWED HIM. A PICTURE OF THE CORPCSIT DRAWING WE HAD oF SUSPECT. . +4
4E STATED THE CORPOSIT LOSGKED LIKE A YOUNG PAN HE.HAD PUT IN JAT SHOP
LIFTING BACK IN JANUARY OR FEBUARY . HE DIDN’T REMEMBER THE EXACT DAY. YE
sJENT GN TG SAY THAT THE YGUNG MAN HE HAD ARRESTED WAS iy ne 49 YEARS ae
3°4@ TG 6’ VERY THIN AND-WAS WARING A GACKET AT THE TIM IE WAS ARRESTED.- HE
3AID HE WASN’T SURE BUT HE THINKS THE NG@N MAY OF HAD A SOTE AND MUSTACH AT ~~
THAT. TIME. oi oe a
a SAID THE SANE MAN CAPE BACK TO THE STORE ABOUT A MONTH AGO AND WAS --
SING OUT FRONT ASKING PEOPLE FOR MONEY AS THEY-CAME INTS THE STORE. =
AOSKIN TALKED TO THE RAR AND ASKED HIn TG LEAVE. THE _ MAR, TOLD HIR HE REEDED.
HGNEY FOR A PHONE CALL $0 HOSKIN GAVE HIN A QUARTER TOLD/HIN To mat HIS CALL
THEN LEAVE. HOSKIN SAID HE HADN’F SEEN THE HAN ON-SEVERSL OCCASION AROUND <
THE STORE AREA AND-EVERY TIRE HE HAD & SPORTS EQAT- OR JACKET GN. HE SAID -HE-
WAS WARING A COAT THE DAY HE WAS ARRESTED AND ALSO THE DAY ‘HE UTALKES TG HIM -
IN FRONT OF THE STORE. AND: ASKED HIM TG LEAVES ‘- > 2
< a ; : ‘a
HOSKIN SAID THE LAST TINE HE SAW THE PAN WAS ON MONDAY THE DAY AFTER PIOTHERS “DAY
HE » HOSKIN WAS GOING INTO THE KRo STORE ON WEST MGUNT HCOUSTOH RO. AND NORTH“
FREEWAY WHEN KE PASSED THE PAN CONMING QUT OF THE STORE. HE SAID THEY @5TH
RECOGNIZED EACH OTHER AND THE RAN TURNED SO AS TO -AVOID HOSKIN. HUSK ENG mesg TCHED
THE HAN GS GUT INTO THE PARKING LGT AND TAKE FOOD STUFFS OUT OF
CROTE: ON THE DAY HE WAS ARRESTED ik SAFEWAY KE STOLD A PACKAGE
= WENT INTO THE STORE-AND TOLD THE MANAGER WhAT
HAD HAD WITH TRE age BEFGRE. HOSKIN SAID THE t%
“ALSO HOWEVER HE-SAID HE COULDN’T TELL IF oi TILE
CAUSE WHEN THEY REET THE RAN - TURNED AUAY FR! N-HIR.
LTRS SAID Ate WOULD RESEARCH HIS RECORDS QR CHECK THE MAIN
“ORAAT % ABGUT THE ARKEST-OF THE MIAN AND CALL US BAL
XT HASN’T CALLED BACK SO I CALLED THE STORE TC CHECK:
eek THAT! NSUERES SAID HE. WAS GUT OF THE STORE 8UT WOULD BE SACK i
ONLY “OTHER INF ae Me HAD ABOUT THE ARREST WAS THAT IT accuacs A
enMmod
“2p
x
a
a
OMSERS FROM 9-28- 83 JO'S-47-84 THAT REL
8935 NORTH FREEWAY. THE LIST WILL BE WIT ‘H THIS REPCAT
WE TYFED UP A YELLOW SHEET WITH A PICTURE OF THE COmPagiT oN TTUAND nab
OF IT WHICH WE TOOK Te ae NORTH SHEPHERD ‘SUBSTATICN AND LEFT We
/ 708
D0 OUT AT ROLE, CALL. - 2 . .
KER ERRRR EE RER A RRT RRR ED
(NCIDENT .NO. 625267604
EX KERR EKER EKER ERE KKK HANES,
’ PASE 2.838
HORROR AE Is,
suPPLERENT ENTERED BY =..38476. ‘ a _
w-8ey _— : ne “es
3EFENSE- CAPITAL MURDE : : —
: STREET: LOCATION INFORMATIGN -
uRSER- 8935 NANE-NORTH 7s TYPE-FUY ~~ SUSFIX>~
pATE OF OFFENSE~B5/ 42/84, _ DATE OF SUPPLEMENT-@5/24/24 -
SOMPLCS] LAST-LANBERT __- FIRST-BOBBY “-MIDDLE-GRANT
_| RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION |
NONE” ; L my
3FFICER4-W.W.OWEN . EHPE-942332 SHIFT-2- DIV/STATIGN-HORTCIDE
DFFICERZ-J.W.ELLIS \EMPE-G3480G SHIFT-2 - _
SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE) 2
PROGRESS REPORT: ~~ ee F
WE, DETECTIVES. ELLIS AND GUEN.- RECEIVED INSTRUCTIONS FROM LT..MASSN
THE INVESTIGATION oF THIS CASE. ci 8
AFTER REVIEWING THE CASE WE CONTACTED DEXTER HOSKINS, HANGGER “OF Ti
STORE, INSUIRING AS TO WHETHER OR NGT- HE HAD SEEN ABLE TO LOCATE At
ON THE SUBJECT HE HAD SPOKEN TO DETECTIVES COOK AND AUTREY ABGUT. 3
ea US THAT IN CHECKING STORE RECORDS HE FOUND NOTHING ON THE
HAD BENTIGNED. HE DID RECALL THE THEFT CONSISTED OF ONLY ONE MEAT.
FORE THEY PROBABLY DID NOT CORPLETE A REPORT OF THE THEFT INCIDE
THAT HE CONTINUE Jo TRY AND LOCATE INFORMATION ON THE SUBJECT IF ME DIG TO CON=y
TACT US. - 7 .
o
Ra
oo
=
meh
ae
r
E CONTACTED HOUSTON LIGHT ARO POWER COMPANY REQUESTING i
Had RECENTLY BEEN LIVING AT 834 MANSFIELO. WE LEARNID
THOMAS HAD BEEN LIVING THERE BUT -SERVICE WAS DISCONTINUED
TG NOX PAYMENT. IN CHECKING FURTHER HLeP FOUND MISS THOMAS HAD AL
ADDRESS OF 9684 WEST MONTGORERY, PHONE 999-8784. 0 = =.
3
+
4
ORMAT
THAT ErNoe ‘aK
@ HE!
IN CALLING 999-8784 WE TALKED WITH HRS. THOMAS WHO ADVISED US THAT HER SON RESI-
NALD WAS THE GWNER OF THE’ 72 PLYMOUTH, LICENSE KWTS33. -FIRS. THOMAS TELO US WHEN-
RARZi LLA SNITH DIED HER SON HAD INHERITED THE CAR. SHE TOLD US HEA SEN WAS AT
4 or TRIPLE AIR PLASTICS BUT SHE WOULD HAVE. Hit CALL US. CHECKING RESINALD
THOMAS K/R 4-6-63, WE FOUND NOTHING. ” :
WHILE STILL IN THE HORICIDE DIVSIOA im RECEIVED i ele
THGORAS. HE SAID He WAS THE GNLY PERSON WHO DRIVES THE
| TONES HIR ABSUT WHETHER ‘OR NOT HE WAS GUT IN THE CAR GN THE NIGHT OF
HE S&iD HE DID NOT THINK HE WAS.. He SAID HE OFTEN WENT TG THE SA
ON GULFSANK AS HIS ¢ GIRLFRIEND, SHRONA REANS, LIVED NEAR THERE
TG THE STORE TO BUY DIAPERS FOR THEIR BOBY's WE -HADE ARANG
TALK WITH REGINALD THOMAS. P
anced HOMICIDE prvsérON. UE 0 DRIVE OUT TG 9604 WEST MONTGOMERY 8234. ONCE -
: + : _* : ; 3 . .c.
EEXEER REE RERERERER ER EE ES ROR RRA nn eee
INCIDENT NO. 625267834 y OFFENSE REPORT ~ : * FASE 2.834
EEE ER RHEE Doe ered ce eres ates Dee a Saree ame
THERE TALKED WITH REGINACD AND HIS HGTHER. REGENALD THet Of WEDNESDAY
WIGHT HAY 43 HE HAD GONE OVER TO VISIT HIS, GIRLFRIEND, SHRONA MEAN
at THE KINGLEY- APARTMENTS 4445 W. GULFBANK t44G7, PHONE 445-485.
THERE ASGUT 7238 OR GPM AND FROM THERE THEY WERT OUT DRIVING. UW 7
THEY STOPPED TO TALK GN A SIDE STREET RIGHT OFF OF STUESNER AIRLINE. WHILE 7
WERE VISITING A TRUCK WITH LIGHTS QVER THE CAB PULLED UP BEHIND THEM AND STOPPED
WITH IT’S LIGHTS GFF. REGINALD SAID HE SPED OFF THID KING IT WAS SOPREGRE TRYIN
7G GIVE HIM SOME TROUBLE. THEY RETURNED TG HIS GT RIENDS AND HE ARR .
SACK HONE SHORLTY BEFGRE 4@PM. REGINALD SAYS HE D NOT 60 75 7 4
STORE ON GULFBANK ON THE. MIGHT OF MAY 43. WE SHOWED HIM THE BONS ES T KET
OF THE SUSPECT AND HE Sars hE DOESK’ T KNOW ANYONE. WHO RESENSLES THI SKETCH. =
IN TALKING FURTHER WITH TRS. THOMAS WE LEARNED THAT - Teo “OF HER STHER SNS.
EARNEST @NO MELVIN WERE ARRESTED ABOUT SEVERAL WEEKS BACK FOR MURDER A’
EEN BEING HELD ay SUVERILE AUTHORITIES. SHE SAID THAT GFF ALL- HER SON
1S oy FAR THE LAST GNE SHE WOULG THINK COULD BE MIXED UP IN ANYTHI S :
HE IS ee FROH HIGH SCHOOL AND GILL ial ATTEND ING WHORTER JUNTOR COLLEGE =
ON A FOOTBALL SCHOLARSHIP NEXT FALL. - oe 7 Lo . 2
RETURN inG ‘TO THE CIDE DIVISIGN WE conracteo THE JUVEN
TALKED WITH JUAN NEZ. FR. IBANEZ -VERIFIED THAT MELVIN
CUSTOSY AND HAD BEEN IN THEIR CUSTODY . SINCE Mate 42, 4984.
OFFENSE CAPITAL RURDER oo
= ‘ "STREET Loca TON 'INFORNATION |
NURBER- 6735 NAME-NOATH
DATE. OF GFFENSE-@5/ 13/84
COMPLTS) LAST-LAMBERT x -FIRST-BOeBY
; RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFO
NONE 0s a
| OFFICER 4=Do ‘CBOK EMP %-854627, SHIFT-4 DIV/STATION-HOR - >
—_ "NARRATIVE Lo
N
_ SUPPLE
DETS COCK AND AUTREY CONTINUED THE I
| BETS ELLIS. AND OWENS FOLLOWED UP- A WRECKER.
| ST THE SCENE GF THIS OFFENSE. THEY DISCOVERED THE DRIVE
6 REGINALD THOMAS WHO LIVED AT 9604 4 MONTGOMERY B22
4s
ARRESTED BY DETS BURMESTER ‘AND COGSK @54284 FOR Mt
RESIDENTIAL’ ADDRESS AS REGINALD. MELVIN ‘WAS ARRESTED“IN CASE 424
HE GAVE A 22 CAL PISTOL.TO ANOTHER SUSPECT USED Zu THE HURDER .
Petencuecaeeeereetoa in eihsialsietctchictantet-aiphaatea? io “eideleisitalaisnisiesacabiere
NCIDENT NG. @2528765 4 ry OFFENSE REPCAT
ERNE RE EE ERK N RR ERIK KEK REE DEI III LEAR OCS Ea RPERKESR,
CLAIMED HE THREW THE PISTOL INTO a DRAINAGE DITCH. THIS PISTOL HAE NOT BEEN
RECOVERED. :
THE COMPL IN THIS CASE. WAS. ALSG SHOT WITH & 22 CAL BULLET.”
DET CONTACTED: MARTINEZ IN THE FIREARMS EXAMINER LAB AND REGUS.
3E RADE BETWEEN THE BULLETS IN THESE .TWG CASES. MARTINEZ ADVI
NO WAY A POSITIVE COMPARISON COULD BE MAGE AS THE BULLET FROM 3
og SCARRED. MARTINEZ STATED,. oe FROM - “2HE SIZE — THE
Talo paau te aes eo Gibvietaed
SUPPLEMENT ENTERED BY = 54627
GFFENSE- CAPITAL MURDER :
STR ET LOCATS TOK INEORMATION -
NUMBER- 8935 NARE-NORTH uye .
DATE OF GFFENSE-@5/ 43/84 : _ DATE OF bh reds ~BEs
CORFLCS2 LAST-LARBERT © FIRST-BOEBY : . 7
. a RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION Py
Ee Ps i
OFFICER4-O.W.AUTREY EMPu-23@ 476 SHIFT~4 DIV/STATZ OR “HOMICIDE : ani
PROGRESS REPORT: - _ ; . y
IDET. AUTREY ASSIGNED TO CONTINUE INVESTIGATION INTG THE AEOVE
LEARNED FROM ROSBERY DETECTIVE WHEE THAT THEY HAC AR TER A SU
ROBGEERY CASE THAT FIT THE DISCRIPTIQN GF THE SUSPECT WAN IN THIS
@LSS THE SUSPECT WAS ARRESTED WITH A 22 CAL. PESTCL:-
Y. Room AND
DET. AUTREY CHECKED THE 22 CAL. PISTOL GUT GF THE PROP
TO FIREARNS FOR BALSITICS COMPARISON WITH THE SLUG RE é
ALSO SUBRITTED WERE THe SIX LIVE ROUND IN THE PISTGL AT THE
ACED' ALONG WITH THIS CASE IS A COPY OF THE ARREST RE BERT GF THE SUSPECT
Hint N/T 2@ @ KENNTH STOKES ANG TWG MUG SHOTS. -: *
SUPPLERENT. ENTERED BY = 38476
LEME ERE RK ERE EER ERG pRB ERR ale pao
INCIDENT NO. @25207854- “OFFENSE REPORT . QD ee ; PAGE 2.633°
dole ahaha tailalalale tialidtiial ff sccacaiializiiaiaieds saieiainaiiass 3 J ec cccien,
NO-@822 : .
OFFENSE- CAPITAL HURDER
SRC re
: STREET LOCATION “INFORMATION... y
NURBER-~ 8935 NANE-NORTH ; TYPE-FuY- ; SUEFIX-
DATE OF GFFERSE-@S/ 43/84 . DATE OF SUFPLEMENT Pov ees aI
conPL CS) Lee eLAnB ERs ccf FIRST-BOSBY -~-- MIDDLE-GRANT oo ey
- | 7, RECOV VERED STOLEN VEHICLES - INFORATION : . 3
NONI Z
OFFICERI‘-J.u. ELLIS . “. ERPE- -83 4863 SHIFT-2 “DIV/STATION= HONICI DE
GOFFICER2-W. WeQWEN: 0° YL EMP#-@42332 SHIFT-2 (><
oe _¢ SUPPLENENT. NARRATIVE <--~ eon
ARAARAWAK AAARAAARAAAARAARASADROGRESS REPORT -S—26—-Q {AAAAAARAAAAAARANARAAAAAAAAL
w E, ELLIS AND OWEN, CONT INSED THE INVESTIGATION OF THIS cag. -
HAVING THE INFORMATION GN GARY GRARCAKA} KENNETH STOKES} As “BE ING INVOLVED IN 4
SEVERAL ROBBERY CASES SITH THE SAME N.G. AS THIS CASE, WE MADE UP TG SPREAD
CONTAINING HIS PHOTS CID% 3376823,AND FOUR FILL- IR PHOTCS CID 2°S 3: 54,327753%
398832,2927433. WE TOOK pees PROTG LINE UP TO WITNESS i
HOME FOR HER TO VIEW.SAFTER VIEWING THE PHOTOS THE WITNESS SA THAT
GARY GRAM LOGKED LIKE THE SUSPECT SHE SAW ON THE NIGHT OF THE OFFEN
CGRPLEXIGN GF THE SUSPECTR SHE SAW WAS DARKER AND HIS: FACE WAS THIN «SHE SAT
SHE COULD NOT SAY THAT THE MAN IN THE PHOTG WAS THE SUSPECT FROM ThE PHOTO.SH
SAID THAT SHE WOULD ‘BE WILLING TO VIEW A LINE UP AT THE POLICE STATION IF ONE
couLD BE ARRAINGED. .
LEAy JING THE SKILLERN HONE WE WEKT TO THE SAFEWAY ‘STOR’
LOGRING FOR RONALD HUBBARD TC VIEW THE PHOTO LINE up,
TONIGHT BUT WILL BE AT WORK TONORROW, .5-27-84.° -
PHOTO OF
EXCEPT THE
OFFENSE- CAPITAL HURDER
STREET LOCATION. INFORMATION ©: - ~~
NURBER- 8935 NARE- -NORTH : : * TYPE-FUY . -- SUFFIX-
DATE GF GFFENSE-85/ 43/84 . - DATE OF SUPPLEMENT-@S/27/84
COMPLCES3 LAST“LARBERT “- FIRST-BOBBY «+ MIDSLE-GRANT
. RECOVERED STOLER VEHICLES INFORMATION
“NONE 2s
|_ OFFICER A~ D. ue AUTREY. : ERP R-€. SBa76 SHIFT-4 DIV/STAT EON-HORZ ZCIDE
RE RR ERR ET EH REE K EERE HY RK KEK RK ERR IE RT Rg RETR RAR Rann an RN Ann
ICIDENT NO. 82528769 OFFENSE REPORT ~~ > : AGE 2.935
ike
[SSE EO RA RI ialeehehaceletolaieiatiiet iolelebslaiaiahands KEIN ed :
. ° & | SUPRLERENT NARRATIVE is,
*ROGRESS REPORT Ce a —_
{ DET. AUTREY ASSIGNED TO CONTINGE TRE INVESTIGATION INTO: THE ASOVE. case —
JENT TO FIRE ARFIS WHERE I TALKED WITH-SARTINEZ ABOUT THE BULLET SUBMITTED
TRON LAMSERTS BODY. HE LOOKED AT IT- AND SAID HE REALLY COULDNT TELL ANY
THING: UNTIL HE FIRED @ BULLET FROM THE GUN SUBMITTED AND COMPARED THE Tuc.
IPICKED UP A PROPERTY RELEASE FROM HIn WHILE I WAS THERE - “AND TOGK IT TO o>:
THE PROPER ROOM “aN. EXCHANGE FOR THE GUN: SUBMITTED. ~2 6-07. 2
I ENT Ta “THE 479 TH DISTRICT COURT WHERE I OBTAINED AN ORDER REGARDING | |
CUSTODY OF DEFENDANT SIGNED BY SUDGE WC MASTER. I TOK: ee ORDER. TO THE COU
JAIL IN THE BASEMENT ANC PRESENTED IT TO THE JAILER.. HE 1E BACK AND o
TOLD ME .GRAHAM WAS IN COURT. € WHICH ONE THEY DIDN’T- KNOW 5) AND TC TRY
BACK AROUND 2:8@PR. : 7 ‘ .
- 8 : . i. ‘ :
I WENT BACK OVER TO THE COUNTY JAIL AT 2:88PM AND -THEY HAD FOUND GRAHAM.
I BROUGHT HIR TO THE CITY JAIL WHERE I LEFT HIP UNTIL SUCH TIME HE CAR
BE FLACED IN A SHG UP AND THEN TRANSFERED BACK TO THE COUNTY. 7°.
NOTE s WHEN I TOOK HIM To THE 3A TL GRAHAS ASKED: To CALL
THE JAILER TO LET HIM USE THE PRONE AS ANY TIMES AS HE
SUPPLENENT ENTERED BY =- 30476 fo Ee *
OFFENSE-CARITAL MURDER o
STREET Location: ENFORMATION - - :
“SUFFIX= 5 ue
NURBER- 8935 _NAHE-NORTH. “TYPE-FUY
DATE OF OFFENSE-@5/43/84 ngs DATE OF SUPPL MES/ET/G4
CORPLCS) LAST-LANBERT ° . \ FERST-BOBBY - MIDDLE-GRANT .
RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION |.
Nae
OFFICERA-3.U.E
LIS oe ENE a~ a3 48e2 SHIFT-2 DIV/STATICH- aonte IDE
OFF ICER2-W.W. GWEN . - EWFH-642332. SHIFTS2 = o
| SUPFLENENT. NARRATIVE
| a
AAARAAAAAAKAAAARAAAAAAAAAAK AA AD ROGER OOS REPORT S-27-Q 4A MAN AAARAAARAAAAARARAAAAAAS
WE, ELLIS AND OWEN, CONTINUED THE IRVESTIGATEON oF THIS CASE.
AT 6:46PH WE CHECKED THE SUSPECT, GARY GRaHAN, QUT OF THE CITY JAIL ANS ADVISED H?
fi THAT HE WOULD BE IN A SHOWUP AT 8:15PM THIS-DATE.HE INDICATED THAT WANTED
peRet -ERESENT A€T THE SHOWUP BUT COULD NOT TELL US KIS ATTGRNE
AID HE WOULD CONTACT THE ATTORNEY THROUGH HIS MOGTHER AND ADVIEL
© OF WITNESS BERNADINE SKE
EP PeLie E STATION TO VIEW THE” SHGOWUP .WE WERE. HET
LWAT_NG TIRE DID DETECTIVES INDICATE TO THE WITNESS WHILE SHE WAS
THAT WE BELIEVED ARY PARTICULAR PHOTOG AS BEING A PERSON ME WANTED IDES IN THE
“PICKED GUT AS BEING IN THE PHOTO SHOWUP SHE VIEW THE PREY
RRERRERAT RRR RAR ee
INCIDENT NO. @25207G84" OFFENSE REPORT. @® +. PABE 2.935
FRRRRRK EE KREK ER RK KER REERKE bd Satori 7 REN KARL ARE HER EKER
TS AT THE STATION “AND ‘RECEIVED A CALL FROM CHESTER THe. i :
GRAHAMS ATTORNEY. THORNTGN STATED THAT.HE WANTEQ TO YIEW THE SHO
POSTPHGNED UNTIL THORNTON “AND HIS ASSOCIATE TOMMY @-BOSTON ARRIVED AT THe.
STATION. . . ;
THE SHOSP BEGAN IN THE SRD FLOOR’ SHOWUP ROOM OF THE -CENTRAL
9:9@P% AND ENDED AT 9:@7PR «WITNESSES BERNADINE SKILLERN AND
ED THE SHOWUP FROM GPPCSITE ‘SIDE OF THE SHOWUP ROOM .PRESENT wu
THORNTGN AND BOSTON DETECTIVE ELLIS WORKED THE FRONT AND OWEN GORKED 7
WITH DETECTIVE BURMEISTER TAKING PHOTOS OF THE SUSPECT A@ND FILL: INS
OF THE SHOWUP ROGN BEFORE BEGINNING THE SHOWUP AND PHOTOS OF THE Sx :
STAGE-PRIGR TO BEGINNING THE SHOWUP ATTORNEY THORNTON UA Tn THE BACK
AND PICKED THE POSITION GARY GRANAN WAS TO HAVE IN THE: Bao au FILL INS:
$ND SUSPECT WORE JAIL WHITES. ~~ _ ote
2p
ALSO PRESENT IN THE SHOWUP ROOF WERE THE PARENTS OF RONALD HUBB AAG Wi SAT oN
THE GPPOSITE SIDE OF THe. ROCK FROR THEIR SGN g ten ectoeenee
AFTER THE SHOW! UP’ MRS SKILLERN WAS TAKEN INTO THE HALL BY ELUTE AND STATED"
THE PERSGN SHE“SAW SHOGT THE COMP WAS THE NAN IN THE %2 POSITIGN CGARY
SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS POSITZVE THIS WAS THE BAN.MRS SKILLERN WAS Y NERVOUS 4
AND-PRIGR TG THE SHOWUP HAD INDICATED THAT SHE DID NOT MISH THE ATTORNEYS TO BES
PRESENT WHEN SHE TALKED TCG ELLIS CONCERNING A POSSIBLE IDENTIFICATION. THE ATTORN
EYS WERE MADE AWARE OF. THIS. RESUEST AND Staay SEVERAL FEET AWAY MAILE ELLIS TALK
ED. TG SKILLERN IN THE Halts : - 3
NEXT RONALD HUBBARD was ASKED IN THE HALL IF HE cout ID: ANY OF THE e one ON TH
E STAGE AND WITH THE ATTORNEYS STANDING NEXT TC HIM HE-SAID HE COUL j
ZE ANY F THE HEN ON THE STAGE AS BEING THE MAN HE SAW SHOGT
BE NOTED THAT HE HAD INDICATED To ELLIS PRIOR .TG THE SHOULP
A LOOK AT THE SUSPECTS Face AT THE Tite GF THE OFFENSE. - 3
EB ALLOW HTS CLIENT TO-=
AFTER THE SHOW yup ELLIS ASKED ATTORNEY THORNTON IF HE +
SPE&K WITH DETECTIVES CONCERNING THIS GFFENSE.HE SIAD THAT HE WANTED TC TALK:-TO4
HIS CLIENT AND WOULD COME BACK DOWN AFTERWARD AND LET US KNOW ABOUT: TALKING TO:
GRAHAM. DETECTIVES WALTED UNTIL 4@:45PA WITH QUT HEARING FR THORNTON. AND. CALLE
D THE JAIL TO FINO GUT THAT THE ATTORNEYS HAD LEFT SCME TIME AGO.DET Bree TING Been:
WENT TG THE JAIL AND CHECKED OUT GRAHAM AT i@:58PM.HE WAS TI
DIVISIGN.ROON B.WHERE HE WAS GIVEN A LEGAL WARNIN E WAS &
GB TG TALK a8CUT THIS GFFENSE.HE SAID HE WAS ADVISED BY -HIS
TO GETECTIVES UNTIL HE CATTGRNEY 3 COULD TALK TO HIN ASAIN IN
et peiee THAT HE ee NET | EVEN KNOW MHERE: TRE Ber aes, STSRE
T
E
3
A
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT: WHILE’ THE ut TNESS SKILLERN was BEING :
THE SHOWSP BY GWEN,SHE TOLD OWEN THAT SHE RECOGRIZcD THE Si $2 ct SoHE: Be
TGUS NIGHT.SHE SAID
THE PHOTOG LOOKED LIKE THE HAN SHE SAW SHOOT THE COMP SUT SHE DID NOT WANT TO
Z fh POSITIVE ID ON THE PHOTC BECAUSE HIS SKIN LOOKEC TOG LG : THE PH@TG.
i BAD VIEW THE FHOTOS SRE PICKED UP THE PHOTS OF THE SU NB- ASKED -
DETECTIVES IF THE FAN IN THE PHOTO COULD HAVE DARKER SKIN THAN THE 7 SHOWED.
PHOTGS |
ny
ANN RAEN KERNAN AD
INCIDENT NO. 25287054 #9.
2.836"
RMA MRK REAK ERE RKEARKE KY
“OFFENSE REPORT
HELE REN HE RR RHR RENEE ET FE PERERA IERE IE NESE IIE IE
SUPPLEHENT ENTERED BY = 34886 - a we 2
Semen
NG-GE25. a : - Ss
OF FENSE- CAPE ITAL fu JRDER : .. et
_ STREET LOCATION INFORSNATION - os af :
NUABER- 8935 NANE-NORTH : “ TYPE-FUY ~~ SUFFIX:
DATE OF GFFENSE-85/43/84 - _- DATE OF SUPPLEMERT-€5/26/8 1. mes
CORPLES) LAST-LANBERT | FIRST-BOBEY — -. MEBOLE-GRANT . i
". RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION 7 i
“NONE » J
OFFICER 4-D.u. AUTERY o. CERPH-850476 SHIEF=4- DIV/STATION-HOM MICIDE © 7
; BUPPLEHENT NARRATIVE: : Jt
PROGRESS REPORT: ot oe a oO _
i ah
I DET. AUTREY ASSIGNED To CONTINUE INVESTIGATIGN INTO THE. ABCVE CASE CONTACTED
ANDERSGN IN FIRE ARHS: AND ASKED HI IF HE COULD DO. THE BALSITIC CCRPARISON
THE SLUG AND PISTOL THAT HAD 8B = SURAT ED. HE ST ATED HE Wi TRY ANG ~~
GET TG IT THIS AFTER NOON. P : N oe
I CALLED WILMA ANOS AT HONE THIS DATE AND ASKED HER IF SRE WOULD 25 ALLE TG +e
COME IN TODAY AND VEIW A SHOW UP OF. THE SUSPECT WE HAD IN JAIL. SHE STATED. | Reais
SHE WAS VERY ILL OULDN’T CORE IN TODAY. SHE WENT ON 7G SAY”
APOINTMENT TODAY. AND WOULDN’T-SE HORE UNTIL THIS AFTERNOON. I
CALL HER LATER THIS AFTERNOGN AND -IF SHE WAS FELLING BE T
TG HER HOUSE AND SHOW KER A PHOTG LINE UP. SHE INDICATED
WELL ENOUGH TODAY. .
I CALLED ANDERSON BACK an ‘FIRE ARRS TODAY AT 2:98PM AND INQUIRES A THE:
BALISTIC TEST. HE STATED THE PISTOL WE SUEZHITTED HAD 6 Lé : RG THE
BULLET THAT WAS SUBMITTED -FROM THE CGMPLS. BODY HAD ORLY SIX bi GROVES.”
TRERE FOR HE sata iT COULDN'T BE THE WEAPON.
KED GARY GRAN GUT OF THE CITY SAIL THIS DATE AT 3:2GP6 AND TOO HIM BACK
‘L CHEC
OVER TO THE - “COUNTY JAIL. Se
SUPPLEMENT ENTERED BY = 38476 °°. ; Tse
i
‘
| -
KEENER UERRERE REET ANAT
INC IDENT NG. @25207804 . OFFENSE. REPORT
FIO KEI REE RII, FIRE III IEEE IEE
no-eoZ6 - -
OFFENSE~ CAPITAL MURDER
: “STREET LOCATION INFORMATION” ~
NURBER- > 8935 NANE-NORTH * - TYPE-FWY
DATE OF OFFENSE-@S/43/84 : : DATE: oF SUPPLEMENT—' 05/25/34:
c HHPLCSI ‘LASTTLAMNE ERT —- FIRST-BOBEY: +. MEDDLE-GRANT -
; sn REROVERED. “STOLEN VEHICLES INFORMATION - y
‘NONE 7
OFFICER(-J.W.ELLIS | EMP u-G348¢8 SHIFT-2 DIWSTATION-HOMTC IDE
wee
(OFFICERZ—W .W.OWEN ENPH-G423392 ‘SHIFT-2-—
, ; — SUPPLEMENT NARRATIVE. wee,
PAA AANA AWRAnAARAARAAASAAAA-MPROGRESS! REPORT S- RBBB Anaenadannananannanhsnnnadins
P
$- HN KE RR
om
;
“a
YE,ELLTS ART GUEN WENT TO THE: DISTRICT ‘ATTORNEY INTAKE OFFICE AND ~ DIScusseD: THI
(CASE WITH ASST.D.A. BRIAN RAINS. CHARGES WERE FILED ON THe SUSPECT GARY
g ENNETH STOKES FOR THE OFFENSE OF CAPITAL MURDER IN-THIS CASE.
ARRESTED AND CHARGED: CAPITAL RURDER 482ND DIST COURT, CAUSE 3353728 ve ts
“KENNETH STOKES @ GARY GRAHAR "HPD 237682 sh
ADDRESS - BIHOMNN soo J
NOTE TG TRIAL ATTORNEY: THE. WIFE OF THE CCHP LORETTA LAMBERT RE ESTED
TON ON TRIAL SETTING.SHE : LIVES in TUSCON ARIZ, .PHY 682-824-3438. :
SUPPLERENT ENTERED BY = 3 4586
ENG OF PAGE Two
SRAYAN
ortrid
1
1
1
I
1
!
1
1
!
1
I
}
1
!
'
1
1
!
t
1
1
!
1
1
!
Hl
i
!
q
i
L
1
i)
1
1
i
1
if
1
!
!
1
1
1
1
!
t
1
1
1
|
or,
etches Sanitaire tert Aa La
“ees oes ;
cesses Re EH
») »)
NO. 335378
THE STATE OF TEXAS 5 IN THE 179™ DISTRICT COURT
vs. § OF
GARY GRAHAM, § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
aka Shaka Sankofa
aka Kenneth Stokes
ORDER SETTING EXECUTION
This Court, having received the Mandate from the Court of Criminal Appeals affirming
the Defendant's conviction in the above styled and numbered cause and having received
notice that the Court of Criminal Appeals has denied habeas relief in the defendant's initial
petition for writ of habeas corpus, cause no. 335378-A, now enters the following order:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendant, Gary Graham, aka Shaka Sankofa aka
Kenneth stokes, who has been adjudged to be guilty of Capital Murder as charged in the
indictment and whose punishment has been assessed at Death by the verdict of the jury and
judgment of the Court, shall be kept in custody by the Director of the Institutional Division of
the Texas Department of Criminal Justice at Huntsville, Texas until Laws doy , the 22" bay
of _June_, 2000, upon which day, at the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice at Huntsville, Texas, at some time after the hour of 6:00 p.m., in a room
arranged for the purpose of execution, the said Director, acting by and through the
executioner designated by said Director as provided by law, is hereby commanded, ordered
and directed to carry out this sentence of death. by intravenous injection of a substance or
substances in a lethal quantity sufficient to cause the death of the said Gary Graham, aka
Shaka Sankofa aka Kenneth Stokes, and until the said Gary Graham, aka Shaka Sankofa aka
Kenneth Stokes, is dead, such procedure to be determined and supervised by the said Director
of the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
The Clerk of this Court shall issue and deliver to the Sheriff of Harris County, Texas a
Death Warrant in. accordance. with this Order, directed to the Director of the Institutional
Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice at Huntsville, Texas, commanding him,
- Be a ilk
>) »)
the said Director, to put into execution the Judgment of Death against the said Gary Graham,
aka Shaka Sankofa aka Kenneth Stokes. Tie Sheriff of Harris County, Texas is hereby
Ordered, upon receipt of said Death Warrant, to deliver said Death Warrant to the Director of
the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Huntsville, Texas.
SIGNED AND ENTERED this 4™ day of May, 2000.
State of Texas )
) Ss In Re Gary Graham
County of Harris )
AFFIDAVIT O: fe) Dd BARD
I, Ronald Hubbard, under pain and penalty of perjury make the
following affidavit:
1.
2.
My name is Ronald Hubbard, I was born’ on 4-10-64. I am
of lawful age to make this affidavit.
In May of 1981, I used to work at the Safeway on the
North Freeway (I-45) and West Gulf-Bank. On May 13th, I
was working on the checkout register that Bobby Grant
Lambert paid for his groceries at. I was not working the
till, I was bagging groceries. I remember Mr. Lambert
bought some foodstuffs and a six-pack of something, it
could have been beer or. something like beer. It was cans
attached to each other. - - na
After I bagged Mr. Lambert’s goods, my manager sent me on
a buggy run. I went outside to collect the carts, we
called them "buggies", that people left outside. I went
outside before Mr. Lambert did.
After going outside I rounded up some of the buggies. I
pushed them along the front of the store towards the
front door. I was heading away from Gulf-Bank. As I was
pushing the buggies someone shouted, "Someone’s been
shot." I ran to the front doors and saw Mr. Lambert
heading towards me. He was coming from the mid-part of
the parking lot. I also saw a young black male running.
He was wearing a white jacket with dark pants. He had
short to medium length hair. He did not look at me so I
could not see his face, but I noticed that he was-about
5’ 6", Iam 6’ 1" so he was shorter than I am, I would
say about six inches. or so shorter. He had a medium
build. I did not see a gun, nor any money in his hands.
He was probably about 50 feet away from me when.I first
saw him. I gave the police this information. I don’t
think I could have made out his face from that distance
at night in the parking lot, but I did notice his build.
No one tried to follow him as he was leaving the area. -
No cars were going after him.
I went inside and told my manager that someone had been
shot. When I looked back I saw Mr. Lambert lying on the
ground with someone bending .over him trying to help hin.
The police called my house about a week after the
shooting. They talked to my mother and father. They
told them that they had caught a suspect, and that. I
should come to a lineup at the police station. When I
+ Ss
got to the lineup I went and viewed a group of young
black men. They were all facing me at first, and then
were made to turn around. I was unable to pick anyone
out of that group that reminded me physically of the
that shot Mr. Lambert, based on the height and build of
the people on the stage. I told the officers that I dia
not see anyone that reminded me of the guy that- did it.
Te The police then made me sit outside and wait while they
showed Ms. Bernadine skillern the lineup. After they
- brought her out, they told me I could leave. I think
that I heard them tell Ms. Skillern that she had got the
one they thought it was.
8. I was never contacted by anyone with reference to this
case since then. I never met or talked with anyone
associated with the defense of Gary Graham, until I was
contacted last month. The prosecution did not ask me to
come to court. I have never been contacted by Ron Mock,
Chester Thornton, nor Merv: West. “Seems 6° oR
I have read this affidavit and it is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me the undersigned authority on this
iQ day of April, 1993.
N s
otary
My commission.
EXPE ‘Ds
s
SS
“ny, F
| , “Uti, GD
| TS
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT f P :
‘USING BLACK BALL POINT ? wet FENDA T D 5
PEN. MAKE SURE ALL N ESCRIPTORS
COPIES LEGIBLE.
Gleaham Cha ca >
TEAST FIRST MIOOLE
i " bine Tr,
ALIAS NA «Michael Deawtac Cuban d YT: hae! h. Renaid ¢ Gait Rin, Keasorh st
RACE: N SEX: M poe EE64, F-5-60, Fea-Gl STATE: Ik
BUILD: Med HEIGHT: S'S" WEIGHT: 150 EYES: bro HAIR: blk SKIN: dha
MARITAL STATUS: —_______u. 8. CITIZEN: —_____# PRIOR CONV:
NAME:
STREET ADDRESS: Ui Kyowde) ADDRESS TYPE:
: T8US7RES/ HANGOUT)
CITY: STATE:
PHONE NO.; ——_________occupation: ST: ZiP:
UCL -t9- -
FBI #: DPS #: SOC. SEC. #: YS 19 Yh © scars:
DRIVER LICENSE STATE: D.L.#: S.0.8:
COPY FOR WARRANT/COMMITMENT
{TO BE ATTACHED)
State of Texas
County of Harris
>) 3
)
) ss In Re Gary Graham
)
AFFIDAVIT OF SHERIAN ETUK
I, Sherian Etuk, under pain and penalty of perjury swear that
the following information is true:
1.
My name is Sherian Etuk and I am of lawful age to make
this affidavit. I am currently employed as a case work
assistant with the Child Protective Services.
I am not related to Gary Graham or anyone else associated
with his case.
In May of 1981, I used to work at the Safeway store
located at West Gulfbank and I-45. I had worked there
for about a year. I had worked with Safeway from 1977 to
1982. I was a checker. Because I was fast I often
worked the register on the express lane. On May 13th,
1981, I was working the express lane. That was the night
that someone got shot in the parking lot then made his
way back to the doorway of the store where he died.
I did not expect the shooting and it took me by surprise.
I was helping an older lady. I think she had more
groceries than she was supposed to have for the express
lane but I helped her anyway. I was fast enough that it
would not have made much difference to other people in
line. Anyway, after I finished checking her groceries
and told her what the bill was she pulled out a purse and
began to start counting pennies. I guess I became a
little frustrated at this and turned and looked out the
window. When I looked out the window I saw a black man
dressed really sharply standing by one of the concrete
columns outside at the front of the store. He was right
up against the window, and appeared to be leaning
slightly. I looked at him for quite a while, more than
a few seconds. He was looking back in my direction and
so I saw him clearly.
A few moments later I looked out the window again and the
young man was in the center of the lot. He had shot the
white guy. I did not see all that happened in the lot,
and I don’t remember seeing the two men scuffling before
the shot.
After shooting the white guy the black guy turned and
walked out of the parking lot. He was extremely cool.
He kinda checked his shoulders to make sure that he was
looking right before he begari walking out of the parking
lot. I did not see anyone trying to follow him.
Ca
| 12.
| 13.
e) >)
The man who was shot walked back to the store where he
fell in the doorway. He fell down and people started
saying he had a heart attack. I told them no, he had
been shot. It was kind of unreal in there, it took a few
moments before anyone went over to him, and it looked
like people were continuing with business as usual. Some
people actually stepped over the poor guy as he was
laying there.
It took the police a while to arrive and when they did
come I think that there was a dispute over jurisdiction
between HPD and Harris County Sheriff’s department over
whose case it was. The police took control. People were
still just entering and leaving the store. They did not
take the names and addresses of everyone in the store,
nor try to talk to everyone.
The body had a lot of money on it. I think the police
ended up with about $6,000. I talked to the police that
night and at a later date signed a written statement.
The guy who did the shooting was real clean. I mean he
was just meticulous in appearance. He had on a white
blazer type jacket and black pants. I could not see his
shoes, but he was clean shaven and had real short hair.
His face was extremely narrow. Just thin from top to
bottom. It was not oval shaped. More like oblong. I am
six feet tall and when I first saw him I could see the
top of his head. His build reminded me of my ex-husband.
My ex-husband was 5’ 3" and weighed somewhere around 130
lbs soaking wet. I’m not sure of the guys exact height,
but he was not tall. He was not taller than 5’ 6" and had
a real slim build too.
I have been shown four photographs of Gary Graham, that
I have signed, and they accompany this affidavit. One
arrest photo, two photos where Gary is in a line-up with
other guys, and one photo where he’s dressed nice. None
of these photos depict the guy who shot the man out in
the parking lot that night. The guy who did it had a
thinner face, and smaller build.
I have also been shown a composite photo drawn by Ms.
Skillern. I have also signed it. The face in the
composite is close, but its shape is wrong. It is too
wide at the top.
After the police showed me the set of photographs I never
heard anything about this case again until this past
week. No one associated with Gary Graham’s defense at
trial ever came to see me or ask me any questions. I had
heard about the Gary Graham case, but had not been
following it. I did not even know that this was the same
case.
oF
4 >
14. I was so scared by the shooting that I asked to be
transferred to another store. Since I’m so tall I
thought that the shooter would easily be able to
recognize me if he wanted to.
I have read and had read to me this affidavit and it is true.
Pheu. be FE
Signed
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me the undersigned authority on this
Sof day of July, 1993.
otary
My commission expires:
% S
ty s
“nd, 1997 aw
Baw
POLEE DEPT
HousTON -TExAS
327 753
9 >
ECLARATION OF ELIZABETH F. puss
Elizabeth F. Loftus declares the following under penalty of
perjury:
is I am a professor of psychology at the University of
Washington. My office address is Department of Psychology,
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195.
2. I have a Ph.D. in psychology from Stanford University, and
I specialize in the field of cognitive psychology. Since
approximately 1972, I have devoted a considerable portion of my
research and writing to the examination of eyewitness observation
and testimony. I have written several books on this subject,
including Loftus, Eyewitness Testimony (1979), and I have also co-
edited a book, Wells and Loftus, ew: ess Testimony:
Psychologica] Perspectives (1984).
3. Because of my special area of study, I have been asked by
counsel for Gary Graham to examine the eyewitness observations and
testimony in connection with the crime for which he was convicted
and sentenced to death in the State of Texas in 1981. The results
of my examination are reported in this declaration.
4. My examination is based on a review of the following
materials: Police Report (Lambert murder); statement of Bernadine
Skillern; composite drawing by Bernadine Skillern; statement of
Daniel Grady; statement of Wilma Amos; crime scene photos; photo
spreads (#1 and #2); lineup report and lineup photos; crime scene
~“¥econstruction report; affidavits of Ronald Hubbard, Wilma Amos,
Malcolm Stephens, Lorna Stephens, Leodis Wilkerson, and Sherian
ee
» | >
Etuk; transcript of testimony from hearing to suppress
identification; transcripts of the trial testimony of Wilma Amos,
Daniel Grady, Meschell Gilliam, and $. Wilson; and report of
Curtis Wills, Ph.D., evaluating eyewitness testimony.
S. The crime that is the subject of eyewitness testimony can
be described briefly. at approximately 9:30 p.m. on May 13, 1981,
Bobby Grant Lambert, purchased about $20 worth of items at the
Safeway store at 8935 North Freeway in Houston. He paid with a
$100 bill and received change. As Mr. Lambert walked across the
lot to his car, a man approached him from behind, and after a brief
confrontation, shot Mr. Lambert and fled. Lambert had sixty $100
bills on his person. The $70 plus in change from his purchase was
not found. At least eight people witnessed the shooting and/or saw
the gunman as he fled from the scene. All of the. eyewitnesses
agreed@ that the gunman was a young black man wearing a white jacket
and dark pants. The differences and similarities of their
additional reported observations are the subject of my report.
6. At the outset, I must note that this is an extremely
unusual case. There are numerous eyewitnesses -- eight that are
known -- yet only one of the eight, Bernadine Skillern, identified
Mr. Graham as the gunman. In one way or another, all seven of the
other eyewitnesses excluded Graham. Six -~ Wilma Amos, Ronald
Hubbard, Leodis Wilkerson, Sherian Etuk, Malcolm Stephens, and
Lorna Stephens ~- estimated the height of the gunman as 5/5" —
5/6", and Graham was 5’9" at the time. The seventh, Daniel Grady,
was apparently shown a photo spread and/or lineup that included Mr.
Aas Zee PAMA-NMA-THE TAH 407 HONG aaral
mam ae
>) ~~.
>
Graham and did not identify him. Wilma Amos and Ronald Hubbard
were also shown photo spreads and/or lineups that included Graham
and did not identify him. wilma amos, Leodis Wilkerson, Sherian
Etuk, Malcolm Stephens, and Lorna Stephens now say positively that
Graham is not the gunman.
7. The sheer number of people who exclude Mr. Graham compel
one to take a closer look both at their opportunities to observe
and acquire information about the gunman and at the process by
which Bernadine Skillern identified Graham as the gunman. on
examination, there is ample reason for concern about the process
that led to Ms. Skillern’s identification.
8. Any analysis of eyewitness identification must begin with
the recognition that the process of eyewitness identification can
produce unreliable memories. There are three distinct cognitive
functions involved in eyewitness identification: the acquisition of
information, the retention of the information, and the retrieval of
the information. Each of these functions can be influenced by a
variety of factors that distort the accuracy of what is perceived
and remembered. Accordingly, the analysis of a particular
eyewitness identification must account for as many of these factors
‘| as possible. With this in mind, one needs to identify the factors
in operation during the course of the eyewitness observations of
the Lambert murder and the processes by which witnesses later tried
| to identify the gunman.
9. Two sets of factors warrant comment with respect to the
is seven eyewitnesses who did not identify Mr. Graham. The first has
> >
to do with the opportunities these witnesses had to acquire
information about the gunman. The second has to do with the
estimates of the gunman’s height.
(a) When information is acquired, we know that the
acquisition is more accurate if it is taken in over a longer period
of time and through multiple exposures. Even if there is only a
single exposure, the acquisition of information is more accurate if
the exposure is relatively stress-free. In this regard,
observations during a violent crime, particularly when a gun is
involved, are often less accurate than observations during a non=-
violent event.
(b) Of the eight witnesses who saw the events, six of
those who did not identify Graham as the gunman -- Amos, Hubbard,
_ztuk, Wilkerson, and Malcolm and Lorna Stephens -- had the
opportunity to observe the gunman in a non-violent situation.
Amos saw him three times in the store, and Hubbard and Etuk saw him
once outside the store before the crime occurred. Mr. and Ms.
Stephens saw him when he ran in front of their car. At the time
they did not know what had happened, so their observations were not
distorted by the violence of the situation. Mr. Stephens also
reports seeing the gunman on several occasions subsequent to the
crime under non-stressful conditions. Finally, Leodis Wilkerson
reported to the police that he had seen the gunman in his
neighborhood both before and after the crime.
(c) Despite the opportunities these witnesses had to
observe the gunman under non-violent or non-stressful conditions,
4 3
the information that some of them acquired may have been distorted
by other factors. Though Amos, Hubbard, and Etuk saw the gunman in
non-stressful circumstances before the crime, they subsequently saw
him in violent, stressful circumstances. On occasion, the
observations such witnesses make during the violent episode
supplant the earlier observations and are subject to the same
inaccuracies associated with any observation in violent
circumstances. Though not made under the extreme stress of
witnessing a murder with a gun, Mr and Ms. Stephens’ observations
en the night of the crime were nevertheless made under stress,
since they nearly hit the man they observed.
(a) Even if some of the non-identifying eyewitnesses’
observations made outside the stress of the crime were compromised,
collectively these witnesses still had a much better opportunity to
observe the gunman than Ms. Skillern did. Ms. Skillern’s
observations were made entirely on the basis of a violent event, ,
where a gun was involved, and where her children might have been at
risk. If her account of following the gunman as he left the
parking lot is credited, she observed the gunman’s face twice, for
only a brief period each time. Both observations were made during
the course of the same violent, stressful event.
(e) With respect to the eyewitnesses’ estimates of the
gunman’s height, one factor is quite significant. Estimates of
height are usually more accurate when they are made in reference to
something or someone whose height is known. Two of the six
witnesses who estimated the gunman’s height at 5/5" ~ 5/6" made
») 5
their estimates in reference to something else. Ms. Amos observed
the gunman face~to-face only a few feet away. She was 52 1/2" ang
noted that she and the gunman looked at each other nearly eye to
eye. Mr. Wilkerson noted that the gunman was shorter than mr.
Lambert, and the medical examiner testified that Lambert was 5/6".
By contrast, Ms. Skillern estimated the gunman’s height as 5’9" -
5/10". As far as the record reveals, however, her estimate was not
made in reference to something of known or ascertainable height.
10. In the face of seven other eyewitnesses who did not
identify Mr. Graham, all but one of whom says that the gunman was
considerably shorter than Mr. Graham, the identification of Mr.
Graham by Bernadine Skillern compels close scrutiny of the process
that led to her identification. That process is one that created
a considerable risk of mistaken identification.
(a) Over the two week period following the crime, Ms.
Skillern was shown two photo spreads, containing a total of ten
photographs. Only one of those photographs, in the second photo
spread, met the two basic facial features of the gunman described
by Skillern, i.e., no facial hair and short-cropped head hair -~
the photograph of Gary Graham. Even if Graham’s photograph did not
match her image of the gunman, Skillern would have been drawn to it
for this reason. In addition, Skillern appears to have been
strongly motivated to help the police.’ A person so motivated
1 Whether Ms. Skillern followed the gunman through the parking
lot or not, her account of doing so reflects a strong motivation to
help the police. Most people who witness a crime are motivated to
some degree to be of assistance to the police. Ms. Skillern
appears to. be highly motivated.
) 5
will often pick out the person in a photo array who comes the
closest to their recollection even if the person does not natch
their recollection. ,
(b) That appears to be what happened here. Skillern was
drawn to Graham’s photograph even though the person depicted there
did not match her recollection of the gunman. According to the
police,
{Ms. Skillern] said that the photo of Gary Gram [sic]
looked like the suspect she saw on the night of the
offense except the complexion of the suspect she saw was
darker and his face was thinner. She said she could not
say that the man in the photo was the suspect from the
photo,
Police Report, at 33.
(c) Having been drawn to Graham through the photo
spread, Skillern may have identified him when she saw him in the
lineup the next day even if he was not the gunman. Graham looked
enough like the gunman to have attracted Skillern’s attention in
the photo spread. In addition, he was the only person who appeared
both in the photo spreads and in the lineup. In these
circumstances, there is an enhanced likelihood that a witness will
identify the person in the lineup whom she has seen in the photo
spread, whether or not the person is actually the one whose crime
she witnessed. This occurs because the witness goes to the lineup,
and the person whose photograph was seen before looks familiar.
This familiarity may be mistakenly related back to the crime rather
than back to the photograph where it may properly belong. It is
well-documented that photo spreads can bias lineup identifications
in precisely this way.
4 4
(a) Skillern clearly recognized, by her statements to
the police following the lineup identification, that she had seen
Graham’s picture previously in the photo spread. As noted in the
police report,
{Wjhile the witness Skillern was being driven to her home
after the showup by Owen, she told Owen that she
recognized the suspect she picked as being in the photo
showup she view[ed] the previous night.
Police Report, at 35. There is no way to determine whether the
identification of Graham was based on the photograph or on
Skillern’s memory of the gunman. However, the risk is substantial
that it was based solely on the photograph.
1d. One other feature of Ms. Skillern’s identification
process must be noted. At least one person has reported that the
police told Skillern after her identification that she picked out
the person who was their prime suspect. If this occurred,
Skillern’s confidence in her identification may have been
artificially inflated. She would likely have felt that she "knew
it all along," a feeling that shrouds an identification in
tremendous confidence even if it is mistaken. For this reason, Ms.
Skillern’s expressed confidence in the identification should be
viewed cautiously. In general, there is little correlation between
the confidence expressed in an identification and the accuracy of
the identification. When a person’s confidence has been
artificially enhanced, this is manifestly the case.
12. Within a few hours of the murder of Mr. Lambert,
Bernadine Skillern worked with a police artist to create a
-composite drawing of the gunman. Not surprisingly, information
8
>) a
that is remembered closer to an event is more likely to be accurate
than information remembered later. Thus, the composite may reflect
Ms. Skillern’s most accurate recollection of the gunman. Several
ether eyewitnesses -- Hubbard, Wilkerson, Etuk, and Malcoln
Stephens -~ have said that the composite fairly resembled the
gunman, confirming to some extent that the composite was an
accurate accounting of the gunman’s appearance. However, they and
the other eyewitnesses have also been clear that Gary Graham was
not the gunman. In these circumstances, where Ms. Skillern is the
only one of eight eyewitnesses to identify Mr. Graham, serious
concerns are presented about her identification. The photo spread
clearly could have biased her lineup identification. Given other
witnesses’ views about the composite, it may well be that when Ms.
Skillern identified Graham she was identifying the person she saw
in the photograph the day before, not the person she saw murder Mr.
Lambert, whose likeness is reflected in the composite.
Eb ght A Mie
Coe F. Loftus Y
‘tL Muenh POLICE DEPARTMENT >)
FIREARMS AND TOOL MARK SUBMISSION _
sre suemirren,_-S “7%: Of * caseno._25SLO70 & f
', ; FIREARMS CASE NO.
JBMITTING OFFICER: D bf, A rrey
7 ~~ @rint Name and Assignment)
DENCE SUBMITTED: -
WEAPON(S) OR OTHER: L Belle (Fiz ef fis s 22 cal)
FIRED BULLETS: : / CARTRIDGES:
FIRED CARTRIDGE CASES:
-
T IS REQUESTED THAT AN EXAMINATION BE MADE TO DETERMINE: beth. fee Ceornrfplad Lite
OFFENSE: Daw dee mE _—_ -DATE OF OFFENSE = _<- LS «Of
LOCATION OF OFFENSE: £FIBS Ws ATK FR eee AY LEE
SUSPECT(S) (Full Name, Color, Age, Sex): wil kb ~ BMA
* ACTIMAS) (Full Name, Color, Age, Sex): R eke VE CRT Leeer Bee 4/74 Ss. 3
| 7 , o
“LEASE SEND (___) COPIES OF REPORT TO: A AecFite ¢ wil
| * a
Okllég 2s0crt ME
sroeceneecccoosensssccnvcnsnrseeesessenosceennoaseoeececcoonsosocesonesecoesees 2090088 CR CO
D FROM: : RECEIVED BY:
| ATE EVIDENCE RELEASED: TIME EVIDENCE RELEASED:
2VIDENCE RELEASED TO:
|VIDENCE RELEASED BY:
9 << 9
HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT
FIREARMS AND TOOL MARK SUBMISSION
pare suemmtes. 82 Es B 4 CASENO._ 2S RE 2708 {
FIREARMS CASE NO,
t
. Whe ee
SUBMITTING OFFICER: Dl. Arne oo How cedec
‘Print Name and Asszrment)
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED:
WEAPON(S) OR OTHER:__-2. 2 Cad Kev tutle fbn Rib _
ea rt 2 ¢ orzo Retaverta ~~ Cit & °F
ALS 2E°5 387
FIRED BULLETS: . CARTRIDGES: Cleve
FIRED CARTRIDGE CASES: : _
Tis REQUESTED THAT AN EXAMINATION BE MADE TO DETERMINE: L th, e Ba Ceo7 é 6 Prom
Li's Gta re Mt ec. Phos e. a - he kullel Al aotty
see BUCE em ERAS ee : pare oF orrense_S i S- &S
LOCATION OF oFFENSE:_2 7% Mo wth. FRC CO
SUSPECT(S) (Full Name, Color, Age, Sex): Kees Gn A NMEAARO
| VICTIMS) (Full Name, Color, Age, Sex): Lz BB CLA ah Lx AAC OF TF
roe
PLEASE SEND(_/___) COPIES OF REPORT TO: lhemiceLe V7 Aathes
i ‘QName and Division)
| Lh léb 30826 Kh GE
! euesessbevaesewsusweusocncoseeeccoese EE a TEE CO :-1: ee
RECEIVED FROM: RECEIVED BY:
_ DATE EVIDENCE RELEASED: . TIME EVIDENCE RELEASED:
_ EVIDENCE RELEASED To:
| EVIDENCE RELEASED BY:
ron POLICE DEPARTMENT —o > a REHORT SY SUPPLEMENT jy, i Vet Incident No__=D20100+ _
5-
NS
TAINANT (S)_Bobby Grant Lambert DATE OF C OF OFFENSE 13-81
DATE SUPPLEMENT MADE 5-28-81
. : . Firearms Case No__263-81__
nations were completed, on this date__5-28-81 :
Firearms Section of the sgentitication Division of the
ing: + * Recelved from:
exial#360170 Locked Evidence Rox, Homicide Diy. _S-27-A1
dixed coated lead bullet Locked Evidence Rox, Homicide Div. 5-15-81
) examinations revealed: the one (1) fired coated lead bullet (EB~1) was not fired in
ibove described weapons
3ER PULL: (Single Action._mmWVUWMUOY (Double Action_____
DITION OF EVIDENCE: Bullet —- Fair, Weapon — Good :
| forementioned evidence will be:
| Retained in Firearms Section}__XX. (Retumed to)
CF Lh Lanes
| ms Examiner, C. E. Anderson #20483 Emp. No. Firearms Examiner, Emp. No:
; ™s Section, Firearms Section, -
fication Division . Kdentification Division
0000,
Dear Governor Richards: April 11, 1993
My name is Loretta Lambert. I was married to Bobby Grant
Lambert at the time of his death in May, 1981. Gary Graham was
convicted of the murder of my husband and sentenced to death. It
is my understanding that he is scheduled to be executed on April
29th 1993.
It has been brought to my attention that there is evidence
that creates a possibility of reasonable doubt as to whether or not
Gary Graham did in fact commit this crime. I do not want the
execution of a possibly innocent man on my conscience. I do not
believe in capital punishment.
I am therefore writing this letter to request that you,
Governor Richards commute Mr. Graham's sentence of death to life.
In the alternative, please stay Mr. Graham's execution and provide
him with an opportunity to fully present his evidence in the
appropriate forum.
I do not want to live with the possibility that the State
executed an innocent man. The death of my husband was a tragedy;
the execution of Gary Graham, who very well may be innocent, would
be a travesty. Please do not allow the State to execute Mr. Graham
on April 29, 1993. Thank You.
Sincerely,
Y fe
“gre, Fem t
Loretta Lambert
ZIMMERMANN & Lavine, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
770 SOUTH POST OAK LANE, SUITE 620
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77056
713-$52-0300
FAX 713-552-0746
June 1, 2000
Mr. Gerald Garrett
Member, Texas Board of Pardons & Paroles
420 South Main
San Antonio, Texas 78204
Dear Mr. Garrett,
We write to request an interview at your convenience to discuss clemency for Gary =
Graham, who has an execution date of June 22, 2000. Today in Austin, we filed our formal
Petition for a Recommendation of a Reprieve of Execution and Pardon, or Alternatively,
a Conditional Pardon or Commutation of a Death Sentence. We understand you will
receive your copy and other materials early next week.
We know that you are not required to meet with us, but we urge you to exercise
your discretion to do so because we truly believe this is a case of an innocent man about
to be executed for a crime he did not commit.
We can come to anywhere you suggest. We request no more than an hour of your
time. We can meet individually with you, or jointly with the other members in your area.
We believe this is even more important today because yesterday Governor Bush assured
the nation that if there is any doubt about a person’s guilt in a death penalty case, other
evidence should be reviewed. -
There are two eyewitnesses who clear Gary Graham, but have never been heard in
court. There is no evidence whatsoever to corroborate the mistaken identification by the
single identifying witness who did testify. This case is a good example of why the Bible
says, “But no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.” Numbers
35:30 and Deuteronomy 17:6.
Can you give us an hour so that you can be completely comfortable with whatever
your recommendation is to the Governor?
|
—— guna Sincerely,
— Pe «
ZIMMERMANN & Lavine, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
770 SOUTH POST OAK LANE, SUITE 620
HOUSTON. TEXAS 77086
713-552-0300
FAX 713-S$2-0746
Jack B. ZIMMERMANN
BOARD CERTIFIED
CRIMINAL LAW June 7, 2000
NATIONAL BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCACY &
TEXAS BOARD OF LEOAL SPECIALIZATION
Mr. Gerald Garrett
Member, Texas Board of Pardons & Paroles
420 South Main
San Antonio, Texas 78204
Dear Mr. Garrett,
We have provided you a videotape that we urge you to view before you reach your decision
ona recommendation to Governor Bush. It begins with a presentation from Jack B. Zimmermann,
outlining our position on clemency in less than 15 minutes. Please watch this portion if you have
time for nothing else.
Following the initial presentation are two recently videotaped interviews of the two store
employees who viewed the shooter in this case. As we explain in the clemency petition, they both
exclude Gary Graham as the shooter. We have provided a videotaped interview with them in
addition to their affidavits which are appended to the petition, because we think the taped
interviews will help you in evaluating their credibility. We ask that you watch them both and reach
your own conclusions as to their credibility. As we noted, Ms. Etuk has been an employee of Harris
County for over 10 years, and Mr. Hubbard is a long-time Postal Service employee. The interviews
last 26 minutes and 23 minutes.
In sum, if you can give us an hour, we believe it will make a difference. Please know that
we made this videotape ourselves — wé are working without a fee at this point — so please listen
to the content and do not be influenced because it is homemade. 1
Since the comparison of the composite drawing of the shooter with the booking photograph
| of Gary Graham is referred to in the opening 15 minutes, a copy is enclosed so you can see it better.
| We also have appended this comparison document to the petition, but we think it is so important
that we wanted it to be at your fingertips. In addition, enclosed is a scene diagram so you can
follow the description by the witnesses. 2
| If there is any question you have, please remember that we would be very grateful to appear
before you in person to address any concern you may have about what we have presented.
Paid + Bur rag
le! Richard H. Bi
‘ Sincerely,
BURR & WELCH Fax?713-523-3833 Jun 18 2000 4:59 P.02
BURR & WELCH
Attorneys at Law
1630 Castle Court, Suite A
Houston, Texas 77006
Richard H. Barr (713) 523-2299
dick@burrandwelch.com fax (713) 523-3833
Mandy Welch
mandy@burrandwelch.com
June 17, 2000
TO: Charles A. Shipman, Merfiber, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles
FROM: Richard Burr and Jack Zimmermann, Counsel for Gary Graham
RE: Matters discussed with Chairman Gerald Garrett and General Counsel Laura McElroy on
June 16, 2000, concerning the Gary Grakam case
Co-counsel Jack Zimmermann and I met with Board Chairman Gerald Garrett and
General Counsel Laura McElroy on June 16, 2000 to discuss the Gary Graham case. Mr. Garrett
asked that we prepare a memorandum conceming the matters discussed during the meeting so
that all Board members might have the benefit of our discussion.
After going over a brief synopsis of the relevant facts in Mr. Graham’s case, Mr.
Zimmermann focused on why we belicve that the two eyewitnesses who did not testify at Mr.
Graham’s trial — Sherian Etuk and Ron Hubbard ~ have more reliable observations about the
shooter than the only eyewitness who identified Mr. Graham, Bernadine Skillen.
In arguing that the observations of Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard are more reliable than the
observations of Ms. Skillern, we do not in any way impugn Ms. Skillem’s credibility. She is
credible — that is, she is telling the truth as she knows it — just as Ms. Etuk and Mr. Bubbard are
credible. However, her account is not as reliable — not as accurate in describing who the shooter
‘was — as the accounts of Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard.
The circumstances under which Ms. Skillern observed the shooter were quite different
from the circumstances under which Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard observed the shooter. These
circumstances explain why the observations of Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard are more reliable than
_the observations of Ms. Skillern.
> Ms. Skillen saw the man in the white coat, by her estimate, for a total of a minute
BURR & WELCH Fax? 713-523-3833 Jun 18 2000 4:59 P03
c C
or a minute-and-one-half ~ the time that elapsed from the moment Ms. Skillern first saw the
shooter approach Mr. Lambert, to the end of the incident, when the shooter disappeared into the
night. During this time, she had only two brief glimpses of the front of the shooter’s face — once
for “a split second” when she honked her hom to try to prevent the shooting and the shooter
glanced at her, and again, for “two or three seconds,” when the shooter was fleeing and she was
following him in her car through the parking lot and he hesitated and glanced at her.' During all
the rest of the time the incident took place, Ms. Skillem had a view of the side of the shooter’s
face or the back of his head.
> By contrast, Sherian Etuk saw the front of the face of the man in the
white coat over a twenty-to-thirty minute period preceding the
shooting. Ron Hubbard, on the other hand, saw the face of the man in
the white coat as he approached him on foot, then looked at him to
speak, and then again as he walked past him.
> The lighting conditions in the parking lot where Ms. Skillern observed the shooter
were marginal. The shooting took place after 9:00 pm, and the lot was dark, illuminated only by
a few lights.
» . By contrast, Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard both saw the shooter in the
‘same place — under the well-lighted overhang immediately in front of
the grocery store.
> Ms. Skillern’s initial observation of the front of the shooter’s face was ata
distance of 30-40 feet through the windshield of her parked car. Ms. Skillem’s second
observation of the front of the shooter’s face was closer — about a car length away — but she was
driving and the child who was in the car with her was screaming.
> By contrast, Ms. Etuk’s observation of the shooter’s face occurred
about 10-15 feet away through the window glass of the store. Mr.
Hubbard, on the other hand, walked within one or two feet of the
shooter and saw hit unobstructed, face-to-face as he spoke to the
shooter.
> Because of what she was seeing, the entire time that Ms. Skillen saw the shooter,
she was experiencing the trauma of the shooting incident and was under very intense stress.
> By contrast, Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard both observed the shooter
without any stressors — no trauma, no negative emotions, no fear of a
These time estimates are found in Ms. Skillem’s trial testimony. See Volume XV, at
~ 331, 389.
BURR & WELCH Fax:713-523-3833 Jun 18 2000 4:59 P.04
( C
gun or of being shot, no screaming child in the car.
> Ms. Skillem estimated the shooter’s height at between 5°10" and 6. However,
she has never expressed a known measure against which she estimated the shooter’s height. She
did not, for example, compare the shooter’s height to Mr. Lambert’s height, nor did she compare
his height to anyone she knew.
> By contrast, Ms. Etuk gauged her estimate of the shooter’s height by
comparison to her husband, who was 5'3". She said that the shooter
was about the height of her husband because she could see the crown
of his head in the way she could see the crown of her husband’s head.
Similarly, Mr. Hubbard estimated the shooter’s height to be about the
same as his mother’s height, which was 5'4". Mr. Hubbard developed
this impression when he walked right by the shooter and looked at
him. The shooter’s height was similar to his mother’s.”
> Finally, Ms. Skillern was subjected to a suggestive identification process. When
she was shown a photo array that included Mr. Graham’s photo, she was drawn to Mr. Graham’s
photo because it was the only photo of an individual with short hair and no facial hair. No one
else depicted.in the photo array had these characteristics, which were the characteristics Ms.
Skillern and ali the other eyewitnesses who saw the shooter’s face agreed on. Even then,
however, Ms. Skillern noted that she could not say that Mr. Graham was the shooter because the
“complexion of the suspect she saw was darker and his face was thinner.” Houston Police
Department Offense Report, at page 33 (Appendix 3 to the clemency petition). The day after she
saw the photo array, Ms. Skillern saw a lineup which included Mr. Graham but no one else from
the photo array. She identified him as the shooter and noted to a police officer that she recalled
seeing his photograph the day before. This process of identification makes it very likely that Ms.
Skillern identified Mr. Graham because she was familiar with him from the photo array, not
because she saw him shoot Bobby Lambert.
> Neither Ms. Etuk nor Mr. Hubbard was subject to a suggestive
identification procéss which could have distorted their memories of
the shooter?
?We also noted for Mr. Garret and Ms. McElroy that the other eyewitnesses who have
given height estimates of the shooter to present counsel for Mr. Graham, and who made their
estimates in relation to their own height or Mr. Lambert’s height - Wilma Amos and Leodis
Wilkerson — also estimated that the shooter was shorter than Mr. Lambert, who was, according to
the autopsy, 5’6". °
The accuracy of Ms. Etuk’s and Mr. Hubbard’s accounts is further confirmed by the
additional evidence of Mr. Graham’s innocence — that his .22 caliber pistol did not fire and could
3
BURR & WELCH Fax:713-523-3833 Jun 18 2000 5:00 P.0S
(
~N
As we have argued in the clemency petition, the reason Mr. Graham was deprived of a
fair trial is that none of the evidence concerning the observations of Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard,
and none of the evidence showing the suggestiveness of the identification process used with Ms.
Skillern and the distortion of her memory that may very well have been caused by that process,
was presented to the jury. The fault for this lay with Ron Mock and Chester Thorton, Mr.
Graham’ s two inexperienced appointed trial counsel. They never undertook any investigation of
these facts and did not present any of this information to the jury. Without investigation, lawyers
cannot represent their clients effectively in criminal cases. Without investigation, they cannot
make reasonable and reliable strategy decisions in defending their clients.
The evidence of innocence that we have put forward is not “new” evidence. It was there
for the finding if trial counsel had investigated the leads they saw in the police report. It was
there for the finding in connection with the first state and federal writ proceedings (from 1984 -
1993) if Mr. Graham’s then-counsel, Doug O’Brien, had thought to access to the police report
and conducted some investigation. That no one representing Mr. Grabam until later in 1993 —
present counsel — undertook any investigation before 1993 should not be held against Mr.
Graham. He has always insisted that he was innocent of the killing of Bobby Lambert, while
admitting his guilt of many other, non-capital offenses. That no lawyer undertook any
investigation of the eyewitnesses until 1993 is not his fault.
Following discussion of these matters, we then focused on the lack of any fair court
consideration of the evidence of Mr. Graham’s innocence. We reminded Mr. Garrett and Ms.
McElroy that there has never been an evidentiary proceeding in court where a judge (1) heard the
testimony of Sherian Etuk and Ron Hubbard under oath and (2) considered the testimony of
Bemadine Skillern anew in light of the suggestive identification she was taken through. Since
April 20, 1993, we as counsel for Mr. Graham have been asking for such an evidentiary hearing,
but no court has been willing to hold a hearing. The number of judicial proceedings we have
gone through in that effort has been characterized by the state as evidence that Mr. Graham has
gotten full and fair review of his claims of actual innocence and the denial of a fair trial. That is
a complete distortion. We have gone to numerous courts to try to persuade those courts to order
a hearing, but none has been willing to do so. In essence, their reason for refusing to hold an
evidentiary hearing has been that the evidence of innocence should have been discovered and
presented in the first writ proceedings, and that it was too late in 1993 or thereafter for the courts
to hold a hearing. !
We concluded our discussion with Mr. Garrett and Ms. McElroy by explaining what we
envisioned by our request in Mr. Graham’s clemency petition for a “hearing.” While we request
that the Board recommend a pardon, conditional pardon, or at least commutation of sentence, we
recognize that the Board may not think that it is in a position to grant clemency until it holds a
hearing within which to consider the relevant facts. The Board is empowered to hold hearings in
“hot have fired the .22 caliber bullet that killed Mr. Lambert.
4
BURR & WELCH Fax?713-523-3833 Jun 18 2000 5:01 P.06
connection with requests for reprieve or commutation of sentence. See Rules 143.43 (f)(3) and
143.57(g)(3). Unless the Board is inclined to grant clemency at this time, we ask that the Board
do what the courts should have done but have failed to do: Require that a hearing be held before
it or a hearing officer in accord with Rules 147.2 et seq. and decide after that hearing whether
Mr. Graham should be granted clemency. The testimony at the hearing should include, at a
minimum, the testimony of Bernadine Skillern, the police officers who had contact with her and
investigated the case, J.W. Ellis and W.W. Owen, Sherian Etuk, Ron Hubbard, and eyewitness
identification expert, Elizabeth Loftus.
If the Board has any doubt about whether Mr. Graham’s case deserves an evidentiary
hearing, we ask that the Board at least hold a hearing to consider oral arguments from counsel for
Mr. Graham and counsel for the State as to whether there should be a hearing.
We urged Mr. Garrett, and we now urge all the members of the Board, not to let the
execution of Mr. Graham take place without at least these minimal steps being taken to assure
yourselves that you are not permitting the execution of a person whose guilt is in real doubt.
At the conclusion of our meeting, we submitted three additional items for the Board’s
consideration. We submitted affidavits from two of Mr. Graham’s trial jurors, who reviewed the
same videotape of the interviews with Ms. Etuk and Mr. Hubbard that we provided to the Board.
After reviewing those tapes, both jurors concluded that they would have voted to acquit Mr,
Graham had t ; ified.
The third item was a seven-minute videotape of a statement by a woman from North
Carolina, Jennifer Thompson, who spoke in Houston on June 12, 2000, about her own experience
as an eyewitness as a rape victim seventeen years ago. Ms. Thompson explained that she
concentrated during the entire time her assailant was in her presence — nearly an hour ~ on
remembering every feature of his face and his body. She then recounted a process of
identification that was similar to Ms. Skillemn’s. She helped construct a composite of the
assailant’s face, she viewed photo arrays, and she viewed a lineup in which she identified her
assailant. She was absolutely certain that the man she identified was the man who raped her, and
her identification of him convicted him and sent him to prison for life. She then recounted that,
after eleven years, another man bragged about raping her. This was a man who was in the lineup
she viewed, in which she identified the other man as the person who raped her. This new suspect
was then subjected to DNA testing, and the testing determined conclusively that he, not the man
she had identified, was the man who had raped her. She explains that her story is a chilling
lesson about how eyewitnesses can and do make mistakes and urges you and the Governor to
take extra care in examining the case of Mr. Graham so that the same mistake is not made with
respect to him.
_ BURR & WELCH Fax 713-523-3833 Jun 18 2000 4:58 P.O1
C C
BURR & WELCH
Attorneys at Law
1630 Castle Court, Suite A
Houston, Texas 77006
Richard H. Barr (713) 523-2299
Mandy Welch fax (713) 523-3833,
PACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
TO: Jack Zimmermann
DATE: June 17, 2000 ~
FAX NO.: 713-552-0746
VOICE NO.: 713-552-0300
NO. OF PAGES: 24 (including cover sheet)
FROM: Dick Burr
MESSAGE: Here is an example of what was sent to each office of
the BPP today. Each memo was personalized to the members of that
office.
ed
This facsimile contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the
individual or entity named above. If the reader of the facsimile is not the intended recipient or the
employee or agent responsibte for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
‘any dissemination or copying of this facsimile is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile
iw ‘error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original facsimite to us at the above
address by U.S. mail, Thank you.
( €
ZIMMERMANN & Lavine, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
770 SOUTH POST OAK LANE, SUITE 620
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77056
713-582-0300
FAX 713-552-0746
Jack B. ZIMMERMANN
BOARD CRETIFIED
CRIMINAL LAW
BOARD OF TRIAL AD
IEKAE DOARD OF LEGAL SPECIALIZATION June 21, 2000
TO: Mr. Gerald Garrett, Chairman, and Members of the
Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles
FROM: __ Richard H. Burr & Jack B. “Ds an
We recognize the late hour, but are compelled to reply to the affidavits submitted yesterday
by the State. We just received copies, having learned of this via the media upon returning from
Death Row yesterday. ~
1) If the State wants you to credit an affidavit purporting to recall an incident occurring
19 years ago, it must be admitting that the affidavits submitted by eyewitnesses Sherian Etuk and
Ronald Hubbard 12 years after the event are reliable for your consideration.
2) Sherian Etuk and Ronald Hubbard reported their observations to police within days of
the shooting. The bailiff and Assistant District Attorney never recorded their information at the
time of its alleged occurrence.
3) No memorandum or note reporting this alleged statement was placed in the file, even
though an experienced prosecutor would have known this could be important and that future
litigation had to occur in a capital case.
4) We know that no note or memo was in the file because there was one evidentiary
hearing after the trial. On January 871988, Gary Graham testified for the first and only time in
court. On redirect examination, he was specifically asked if he committed this offense. He said
he did not. He then was asked if he ever told anyone, or admitted to anyone, that he committed
this offense. He said he had not done so. This would have allowed the prosecutor to ask him if
he had made the statement now attributed to him 19 years later. The prosecutor never asked that
question.
5) If the statement had been made, it would be noted in the file. If it were in the file, it
would have caused the question to be asked of Mr. Graham. No such question was asked. The
testimony, including the State’s cross-examination, is found at pages 213 to 218 of the transcript
of the 1988 state writ hearing.
The 11th hour submission by the state emphasizes the need for a hearing to resolve matters
after cross-examination. We urge you to recommend a reprieve, long enough to conduct a
hearing, decide the reliability issues yourselves, and then make your recommendation to the
Governor.
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF HARRIS §
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared GE
we known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed below, who being first by me
duly sworn did depose and say:
“My name is ary Iam over 21 years of age. I am of sound
mind, and capable of making the following statement.
I served as a juror in Gary Graham’s case in 1981. I voted to convict him.
I based my decision on the evidence that was presented at the time. There was no
scientific evidence. The only evidence that connected Mr. Graham to the
} shooting was the testimony of Bernadine Skillern, She was the witness who
identified Mr. Graham. No one contradicted her, and I did not think there was
any evidence to show that she was mistaken.
I have watched a videotape that I understand was sent to the Board of
Pardons and Paroles. I am concerned that the jury did not have all of the facts
when we made our decision. If I had heard the testimony of Sherian Etuk and
Ronald Hubbard, it would have made a difference to me. If I had known that Mr.
Graham was the only man in the live lineup whose photograph had also been
shown to Bernadine Skillern the day before, it would have helped explain why she
might have been mistaken. If I had known that Mr. Graham’s pistol did not shoot
the bullet that killed Mr. Lambert, it would have made a difference.
I believed what Sherian Etuk and Ronald Hubbard had to say. At the very
least if I had heard Bernadine Skillern, Sherian Etuk and Ronald Hubbard testify I
would have had a doubt about who was right. I would not have been able to
convict Gary Graham on that evidence. I would have voted not guilty. I am in
favor of putting off Gary Graham’s execution until things can be cleared up. I
think it is important that all of the evidence be heard before a man is put to death.
2»
The above statement is true and-corr
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED be! Wa i a L 1,
Notary Public in and for
The State of Texas
EER GENE H. BOYD
NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF TEXAS.
Ek) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES
rare JUNE 30, 2004
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF HARRIS §
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared SE
known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed below, who being first by me duly sworn
did depose and say:
“My name os 4 Tam over 21 years of age. I am of sound
mind, and capable of making the following statement.
I served as a juror in Gary Graham’s case in 1981. I voted to convict him,
and I voted to answer the questions that I thought would assist the judge in setting
punishment. I based my decision on the evidence that was presented at the trial.
The evidence that allowed me to find Mr. Graham guilty was the testimony of the
woman who said she saw Gary Graham shoot Mr. Lambert. She was the most
important witness.
I have watched a videotape that I understand was sent to the Board of
Pardons and Paroles. I do not understand why Gary Graham’s lawyer did not
bring those witnesses in to testify. I was also surprised to learn that there was a
ballistics test that said Graham’s gun did not shoot Lambert. That would have
made a difference to me. Sherian Etuk and Ronald Hubbard seemed to me to be
telling the truth. At the time, I thought the state’s witness was telling the truth
also. If Etuk and Hubbard had testified at the trial I think the outcome could have
been different. I cannot speak for the other jurors, but I would have had a serious
doubt about him being guilty.
I think all of the evidence should be gathered up so a judge or jury could
hear the case before Mr. Graham is executed. I think there was a screw up in the
system in this case. I do not think that Gary Graham got a fair trial.
The above statement is true and correct.”
ca
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me “a day pe >
EB her GENE H. BOYD Notary Public in and for
TARY PUBLIC. STATE OF TEXAS The State of Texas
JUNE 30, 2004
AFFIDAVIT
ed 5
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared Poe
, | known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed below, who being first by me
duly swom did depose and say:
“My name is arenieaarimest I am over 21 years of age. I am of
sound mind, and capable of making the following statement.
I served as a juror in Gary Graham’s case in 1981. I voted to convict him,
and I voted to answer the questions that the jurors knew would mean a death
sentence. I based my decisions on the evidence that was presented. It was a
difficult decision. There was no smoking gun. There were no fingerprints. No
physical evidence was presented that tied Gary Graham to the crime. The only
evidence that connected Mr. Graham to the shooting was the testimony of
Bernadine Skillern. She was the witness who identified Mr. Graham. No one
contradicted her. I do not remember any evidence to show that she may have
been mistaken.
If I had heard evidence from other witnesses that were at the scene that
differed from what Bemadine Skillern said it would have made a difference to
me. I have viewed a vidéotape that contains interviews with Sherian Etuk and
at Ronald Hubbard. I understand that this videotape was sent to the Texas Board of
’ Pardons and Paroles. My impression of both Mr. Hubbard and Ms. Etuk is that
\ they are sincere and credible. If they had testified at the trial it could have made a
| difference in the outcome of the trial. What they had to say causes me to have a
I doubt about Bernadine Skillern’s testimony. The jury should have had an
opportunity to hear them testify and be cross-examined
i I do not understand why these witnesses were not presented by the defense at the
\ trial. I also do not understand why the jury did not learn that the gun Gary
| Graham was arrested with could not have fired the shot that killed Bobby
Lambert.
Tam concerned by these omissions. !t bothers me that the jury may not have had
i all of the information it needed to make the correct decision. { am not
comfortable with this execution being carried out under these circumstances. [
would be in favor of delaying the execution until a jury can hear all of the
evidence at the same time.
The above statement is true and correct.”
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me on thi day of June
