Justly Johnson was found guilty of murdering his wife and three children. Johnson's conclusions were based only on the documents provided to me. No physical interviews or scene investigation were conducted by myself.
Justly Johnson was found guilty of murdering his wife and three children. Johnson's conclusions were based only on the documents provided to me. No physical interviews or scene investigation were conducted by myself.
Justly Johnson was found guilty of murdering his wife and three children. Johnson's conclusions were based only on the documents provided to me. No physical interviews or scene investigation were conducted by myself.
February 29, 2011
After careful review of Homicide File #99-163 and the resulting
transcripts of the criminal trial versus Justly Johnson in which Mr.
Johnson was found guilty of murder, several questions were left
unanswered which I feel might have impacted this investigation
with different results regarding Mr. Johnson’s future. As a retired
Detroit Police Officer and former Homicide Investigator with the
Detroit Police Department I examined the documents provided to
me and came to the below conclusions. It must be noted that my
conclusions were based only on the documents provided to me and
in no way meant to offend or embarrass the investigative efforts of
the investigators originally conducting this investigation into the
murder of Lisa Kindred that occurred on May 9", 1999. No
physical interviews or scene investigation were conducted by
myself,
The facts of the case are this; Lisa Kindred, a white female
thirty-five years of age, was parked in front of 4470 Bewick ina
99° Plymouth Voyager van with her three children. Her husband, a
William Kindred, black male twenty-six years old, was inside the
residence of a Verlin Miller, brother-in-law of Mr. Kindred
discussing the sale of a motorcycle. Mr. Kindred spent a lengthy
amount of time inside the residence which prompted Lisa Kindred
to exit her vehicle several times and go to the door of the residence
to inquire when her husband was ready to leave. Lisa Kindred
returned to her vehicle where subsequently a person or persons
approached and fired one (1) .22 round into the drivers window
striking Lisa Kindred in the chest. At this point Lisa Kindred
drove her vehicle away from the scene and came to rest at a
Marathon service station where she collapsed from her fatal
wound. These are the facts of the case and where the investigation
into her murder begins.1. My first suspicion into the case rests with William Kindred.
Nowhere in the documents provided to me is a criminal case
history background of Mr. Kindred. After reading his statement to
police several “flags” went up in my mind. He states he didn’t hear
a gunshot but chased a person through the neighborhood that he
clearly can’t even ID the sex, race, or physical description of that
person. And why is he chasing them in the first place? He observes
no weapon in this persons hands. Where was his concern for his
wife and three children who had sped away from the scene? Mr.
Kindred’s relationship with his wife was a rocky one. From 1995
to the time of the murder of his wife, the Roseville Police
Department had responded seventeen (17) times to the Kindred
residence on domestic violence calls, child abuse, and other related
issues. Clearly this indicates a further investigation into Mr.
Kindred as a possible suspect. The late night meeting with his
brother-in-law unannounced is another “flag”. It should also be
noted that an insurance claim was paid out to Mr. Kindred thirty-
three (33) days after his wife’s murder. Sergeant Kathy Adams, the
OIC (officer in charge), absolved Mr. Kindred’s involvement with
his wife’s murder. Based on what? The initial statement? There
appears to of been no further investigation into the possibility of
Mr. Kindred, especially knowing that this is Mr. Kindred’s old
neighborhood where he still has family, and most importantly,
knows the two defendants convicted of this crime. This avenue
was never explored. Also, no inquiry of any weapons owned by
Mr. Kindred were investigated. On February 7", 1998, the
Roseville Police confiscated a .22 rifle from Mr. Kindred’s
residence in relation to a domestic violence call. Lisa Kindred was
killed with a .22 cal. Bullet. Any “flags” here? This was never
explored. Mr. Kindred was never asked several key questions
which might have exonerated him. Also of note is that the
victim’s sister, Jody Gonterman, a detective with the Albuquerque,
New Mexico Police, stated her sister Lisa told her if anythinghappened to her to suspect her husband as being responsible.
Many questions remain regarding Mr. Kindred’s involvement with
his wife’s murder.
2. Convicted defendant #2 in this case is Kendrick Scott, a black
male twenty years old at the time of this event. His actions that
night as recorded by several witness statements reflect his intention
of diverting attention to himself by claiming to have seen two
males going down the street with rifles. His girlfriend looks out
her window and observes two males but with no weapons in hand.
It appears Mr, Scott is attempting to divert attention away from
himself because he repeated these actions with other witnesses. I
affirm a strong investigation into Mr. Scott and his actions that
night, but when taken into custody shortly thereafter the murder, a
standard gunshot residue test was never performed on Mr. Scott’s
hands to determine if he fired a weapon, nor a GSRT on his
clothing or hair. (Suspects familiar with investigative technique’s
are aware of this and may change clothing, wash their hands, etc.,
but most times do not wash their hair where gunshot particles
remain for some time). There is no record in the file or mention of
this at trial. Why was this not done? Also, on June 5", 1999, Mr.
Scott requests a meeting with the Homicide detectives with his
attorney present while locked up at the Wayne County Jail to give
information on the shooter in this case. No record exists that any
such meeting took place. Why?
3. In the initial Homicide team-assigned report prepared by
Sergeant John Falk on May 9, 1999, he states this is a “straight up
carjacking”. Based on what? I see nothing in this initial
investigation to suggest this, nor does Sgt. Falk give any reasons
for this assertion.
4, Anthony Raby, incarcerated at the time in the MDOC,
Inmate#646575, is the brother of William Kindred. This personsent a letter to Justly Johnson on September 24", 2007. Why?
What’s the connection here?
5. Witnesses Raymond Jackson, B/M/22 and Antonio Burnette, a
B/M/14 (at the time of this event), are the only witnesses that give
testimony in this case that convicts defendant Johnson and Scott.
From the statements given to police and testimony at the
preliminary exam and trial, I don’t understand why with all the
inconsistencies and contradictions that detectives based their case
solely on these two witnesses accounts. Neither witness observed
the shooting nor has either witness ever observed these defendants
with a weapon. No CCH is located in the file on these two
individuals to at least gain some insight to their credibility. Of
note, both of these witnesses have recanted their statements
admitting lying under oath during the trial proceedings.
6. Convicted defendant Justly Johnson, black male twenty-five
years old at the time of this event. According to alibi witnesses,
Mr. Johnson’s cooperation with the police and no eyewitnesses or
physical evidence to link Mr. Johnson to this crime, his conviction
based on the two witnesses mentioned above, is appalling.
I believe based on the records and information I have that a
thorough investigation was not conducted. There are too many
holes and questions unanswered. Even further incredible is that a
criminal trial resulted in the conviction of Justly Johnson. Police
have an obligation to investigate and bring forth perpetrators
responsible, however in this case, I believe further investigation
was warranted but did not occur. Injustices in the criminal system
do occur but can be prevented or kept to a minimum by exploring
all avenues wherever the investigation takes them to prevent the
wrongful conviction and incarceration of our citizens.Respectively,
Mt (hele
Michael Carlisle
D.PD. (Ret.)