PART Lo Z IN THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR ESCAMBIA COUNTY, PLORIDA STATE OP FLORIDA, ve, ZANE DALTON CROWDER, Defendant Governmental Center, APPEARANCES : FOR THE STATE: FOR THE DEFENDANT: January, 2011, at the M.C. Blanchard Judicial Building, 190 CASE NO: -2098-CF-2822 2810 VOLUME IZ Proceedings held in the above-styled cause before the Honorable Jan Shackelford, Circuit Judge, on the 2ist day of a Pensacola, Florida 32502. 42 ee MATT GORDON, ESQUIRE Assistant State Attorney 190 Governmental Center Pensacola, Florida 32502 osayoa3a NOISIAIO S PATRECE CASHWELL, ESQUIRE Attorney at Law 201 Bast Government Street Pensacola, Florida 32502 PRTRICE R. POOLE, RPR Shon cuca = COPY10 a a2 13 14 15 16 a7 as 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 WITNESSES Terrie Webb Danielle Levi Arlington Levi Shyane Ellis Tony Godwin Linda Kahl Teresa Greenquist Charles Dickin VOLUME T1 Jennifer Krumbein Danielle Levi William Davis Zane Crowder SUATE EXHIBITS Exhibit No. 1 INDEX 200 DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 38 56 75 104 122 132 275 187 201. 219 220 225 45 54 6s 1” 85 95 112 320 aaa 129 162 13 ae aan 194 196 21 24 aig 223 230 EXHIBITS MARKED IN_EVIDENCE 13914 as 16 7 a8 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 201 (VOLUME II) MS. CASHWELD: I call Ms. Walker. THE COURT: Jennifer Walker. (Pause in proceedings) (witness sworn) ‘THE COURT: Have a seat. Pull up to the microphone. please. State your name and spell your last name, THE WITNESS: /Gennifer-Keumbei,” K-R-U-M-B-E-I-N. ‘THR COURT; Wait a minute. Hang on a second. I'm supposed to write a list of witnesses, and I got off thinking you were Jennifer Walker. WHEREUPON, THE WITNESS: Yes. I'm newly divorced. THE COURT: Sorry about that. ‘THE WETNESS: I'm not. THE COURT: Okay. Spell your last name THE WITNESS: K-R-U-M-B-E-I-N. THE COURT: You may proceed, Ms. Cashwell. JENNIFER KRUMBEIN, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CASHWELL:20 a 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 202 Q. So your name was Jennifer Walker -- A, Yes. Q. -+ when you did this investigation but you've changed it? AL Yes. And if you could, where do you work? A. With the Department of Children and Families. Q. And what's your position within DCF? A. Currently I'm a supervisor. Q. And what were you at the time of this incident? A. I was an investigator. Q. Child Protective Team investigator? AL Yes. Q. Or child protective investigator? A. Child protective investigator Q. TE you can kinda let the jury know what your job duties are as a child protective investigator? AL Investigate allegations of child abuse, Hsu neglect or abandonment. INvesTie: zane AS @. How do you go about doing that? eee se etee as edge hae arc gecalesi CEUs) victims, interview the parents, interview the schcol, doctors, neighbors, relatives. So basically you try to have contact with just iRaadle PS ewe iM A203 1 | about every entity or person thet has contact with the child 2 | to try and get a holistic picture? 3 A, As much as you possibly can. 4 Q. And if you could, what's your educational 5. | background? ‘ A. T have a bachelor of science 7 Q. And did you receive any training in order to 2 |be a child protective investigator? 9 A. ‘I've had probably over a thousand hours. 10 Q. Im this case, were you the investigator that 11 | was assigned? 12 AL Yes. 13 Q. Okay. And you were assigned on what date? ; u A. I'd have to look. Can I look? 1s Q. ‘That's fine. 16 MS. CASHWELL: Is that okay? 17 MR. GORDON: Yes. sare ™ ‘THE WITNESS: March 14th 18 Q (By Ms, Cashwell) And on March 14th, you 20 | received thie referral that you need to investigate. what's 21 |the first thing you do to investigate this case? 22 A, Usually we try and find the child first. 23 Q. What did you do in this case? 24 ‘A, ‘I believe I went to the address provided, and 25 the child wasn't there, So I spoke to the mom and the ASK Sertoli TR most iF Net, Abe o7iten 2 CASES Pred TR CHRD WW Quest WA AvatAbee. .Cpeatyes Levis wax saqreiie Soteyay 18 39 20 2a 22 23 24 25 204 stepfather. Q. And that address would have been on Edison Drive? Ta have to lock. Yeah, I believe so. Wherever they were living at the time. They were living with friends. Q. On Webster Drive? A. Nes, I think so. Q. Okay. And so you spoke to the mom and dad - or the mom and the stepfather? A. Uh-huh (Indicating affirmatively). 9. Now prior to speaking to them, had you gone gut _to the school at all? A. I think I did actually, I think T went there wasn: re. She had been kept home. So then I went out to the house. 9. And when you went to the-school, did you speak to any of the school personnel, students, look at her grades, that sort of thing? A. might have retained her grades. Can T look? Q. Go ahead and look. It's okay. A. I did obtain her school records, and I talked to the guidance counselor. @. And the guidance counselor was familiar with shyane? ke FSSSsSeSSeee10 a 12 13 “4 15 19 20 au 22 23 24 25 208 A. She was, and she said she did not have concerns. ee COURT: Ma'am, just answer the question; don't volunteer stufé. ©. (By Ms, Cashwell) After you went to the school and spoke to the guidance counselor and you collected her grades, that also included attendance, right? A. Uh-huh (Indicating affirmatively). ves. sorry. Q. ‘That's okay. then you went to Webster Drive and had contact with the stepfather and mother? ac eevea @. And we're going to get into that. The next thing you did is, you went where? he child was at, what they call, the mother)to that house Q. And did you also interview Ms. Webb, the Godmother? A. Yes. Q Now when you were interviewing Ms. Webb, were ~ —, you taking (contemporaneous hotes? A. Yes. Q. And what's the purpose of taking those notes while you're interviewing witnesses?20 2a 22 23 24 25 206 A. So I can -- I have to enter what people say and what I do into our computer system, so it's for my memory. @. Okay. And do you strive to make sure you're accurate? A, All the time. @. Okay. When you spoke to Ms. Webb, you spoke to her on the iéth of March at approximately 11:07 in the morning; is that correct? = Sw DAy ! tw WAST SHyA AL can I check? in 7 Scthsi on nl DG : Age? ssp thw 3 Q. Oh, most definitely. fe A Yeah, around that time. oe aime And when you (poke ko Ms. Webb, did she -- did she relay to you that the allegations by the child were that ee ig she had been touched in hex{ front} and ner(back lpr just her front? A. Both the front and the back. Q. And you have a clearcut note about that? A. Uh-huh (Indicating affirmatively). Yes Q. And did she also relay to you any information about Christine's (sic) house? A. I'm sorry? @. Were you told anything about some woman named Christine? Your Honor, I'm going to object Vca10 a 12 2B a4 3s 16 a7 1s 29 20 2a 22 23 24 25 207 to hearsay. MS, CASHWELL: Your Honor, it's a prior MR. GORDON: Your Honor, may we approach briefly? THE COURT: Counsel approach. (at the bench: MR. GORDON: Your Honor, 3 understand your prior ruling. This is different. This is not an inconsistent statement, The investigator never asked about it, and it was a mullity. So therefore there's not any controverting evidence, it's just a lack of evidence. I would indicate that does not fall within prior inconsistent statement and is a hearsay objection. MS, CASHWELL: It is not, Your Honor. It is a prior inconsistent statement because she asked specifically ehe asked, where did the child say this took place, and she was told the o: house and that!s all_she yas told, So it is a prior inconsistent statement. ‘THE COUR’ I'm going to overrule the objection. Continue. MS. CASHWELL: 1I'11 build the foundation. THE COURT: You may proceed. i |ee, 4y eZ 10 ub 12 33 14 15 216 17 ae ag 20 a 22 23 24 25 208 (Bench conference concluded) 2. (By Ms. Cashwell) Ms, Walker, when you're speaking to Ms, Webb and you're asking her about what she had been told by the child, one of the questions that you asked her was, where did the child say this occurred; is that correct? A, (No response) . Q. Do you have the -~ A, Yeah, I'm reading. I don't see in my notes specifically, unless T'm missing it, where this happened -- that I asked Ms. Webb where this happened. @. Okay. Is that a question that you would have asked her? A. Not her, no. 9. Okay. Did you ask the child that question? A. Yes. Q. And when you asked the child that question, the child told you it happened at the old house -- or at the house? B. ‘The old house, T think is what she said. Q. Yeah, And when the child said it happened at the old house, the child never said it happened at Christine's house; is that correct? A, I don't recall ever hearing the name Christine 5 HyAne ADA Cee las Hou Ape?10 an 12 2B 14 as 1s 17 18 19 20 aa 22 23 24 25 @. Now, you -- I want to go -- on that same day that you spoke with Ms. Webb and you spoke with the child, you also spoke with Abe Levi; is that correct? A The Q. The A, Yes. Q And yelay to you that stepfather? stepfather, when you spoke to the stepfather, did he the child had told him that things were placed inside of her? A. Yes. Qo. and asked her general that correct? A ves. Q. and Ms. get guidance THE vs. (ae MS. when you spoke to the child herself, you questions about her home environment; is CASHWELL: Your Honor, may I approach to from the Court? COURT: Okay. CASHWELL: Thank you. Sorry. the bench: CASHWELL: Because once the cat's out of the bag, it's out of the bag. The fact that she the child about how her parents get along, whether they gently yell at each other or stuff like that, it's not a prior inconsistent, it is hearsay.. ee 10 wn 32 a3 a4 15 16 a7 18 19 20 au 22 23 24 25 MS. CASHWELE: Then I won't go there. Thank you. (Bench conference concluded) Q. (By Ms. Cashwell) When you were speaking to the child, did the child -- what was the child's demeanor as she was speaking with you? A. She was friendly, pleasant. 0. Did the child ever, when she was telling you something, in any way indicate that, you know, she wasn't sure about what she was saying? A. Not really, no. Q. Okay. do she was straightforward with you, looked you in the eyes as she was giving you information? A. Yes. Q. And one of the pieces of that information she gave you as she was looking you in the eyes is that neither her mother nor her stepfather smoked; is that correct? A. Correct. Q. pid the child ever come back to you later and tell you that that was not true? R. _‘I only interviewed her one time. . And when you spoke to the stepmother (sic), id the stepmother ever tell you that she was away on a 45-minute nail appointment while they were renovating the10 a 12 13 ua a8 as a7 18 19 20 aL 22 23 24 25 house during the summer of '09? Stepmother? Q. Z!m sorzy, the mother. Danielle nevi. BR. Can I look at my =~ sure. A. No, I don't have anything about being way for a nail appointment. MS, CASHWELL: I have no further questions. Thank you. ‘Tue COURT: Mx. Gordon? MR. GORDON: Yes, Your Honor. CROSS-EKAMENATION BY MR. GORDON: Q. Ms, Krumbein, what are your responsibilities as a child protective investigator for DCF? A, Tavestigate the allegations that are made and make a determination based on the information that we obtain. In this case, we also consult with the Child Protection Team. As I said before, we talk to various people when ever we have an investigation to gather evidence and information. Q. And did you do all of that in this case? A. Yes. 24h10 an 12 13 14 15 36 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a2 Q. And -» but everything that you know about is what other people have told you; is that correct? A. Correct. Q. And did they tell you everything that they > Hw wed AMyé d kmew about the allegations? a prove THS 2 cap Gs Q. And did you xeport ali of that in writing your xeport? AL Yes. Q. And was it a lengthy report? A. Fairly, yeah. And was there more to your report than what you were just asked about? A. I spoke to the biological father of the child. Q. Did you speak to all the different witnesses, auedeet ut particular to the vic im, at length about the allegations? AL Yes. Q. What is the purpose for you preparing your records? A. So that there's a documented -- I'm trying to look for the right words -- documented in our system as far as what we've done. The allegations come in. We have to document what we've done to, like I said, either prove or @isprove the allegations are true or not. It's to keep a esponas ¢ SUK i BB igi ee Apres Assam tind oF gy Shy" > EGA THe Victim, 4 THe Tom OR10 an 12 13 Ma 15 16 47 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 213 record. Q. But in preparing your record and preparing your notes, is that Just your transferring your memory, paraphrasing what the people said into a document that is not intended to be used as testimonial evidence like a transcript? MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, objection, Compound question. THE COURT: Tf she can answer it, I'll allow her to answer it. ‘THE WITNESS: Can you repeat it? Q. (By Mz. Gordon) 1411 just rephrase. Do you write your report with the intention that it will be used like a transcript? A. Yes, I guess. Q. mean, is someone there taking down everything that is said as it's said? A. No. 9. or do you transfer it at a later time? A, I transfer it at a later time. MR. GORDON: No other questions. THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CASHWELL: Q. Ma. Walker, he asked you whether or not you LOa 2 10 a 12 a3 14 15 16 a7 a8 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 Bud did an investigation, and you spoke to a wide number of people that had contact with Shyane; is that correct? nieives Q. And you did that in this case? A. I talked to numerous people, yes. Q. And at the end of your investigation, you found that based, on your conversations with all of these people, that in your estimation and your investigation, she did not exhibit -- did not exhibit signs of abuse or neglect? MR. GORDON: Objection, Your Honor. ‘THE COURT: Sustained. MR, GORDON: Objection, Your Honor. May we approach? (ur, Gordon speaks to witness) (At the bench: MR. GORDON: Z'11 withdraw my objection, Your Honor. MS, CASHWELL: He just talked to a witness who's on the stand who's under oath without Counsel being present. ‘THE couRT: Feel free to float on up there. MS. CASHWELL: Thank you. THE COUR’ Mr. Gordon, repeat your question. (Counsel and witness have an off-the-record discussion)Lo a 12 13 a as 16 a7 18 a9 20 au 22 23 28 25 215 THE COURT: Patrece, you move too fas’ MR, GORDON: Your Honor, if T just may ask since she's encountering new territory, if I could have the right to redirect (sic). THE COURT: Are you still objecting to the question? MR. GORDON: Your Honor, I just as that since it's a new area outside of the scope of her prior questioning that I have the opportunity to re-cross, if necessary. MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, it wasn't -- THE COURT: That is a totally new question. MS, CASHWELL: Well, he brought it up. He asked her about her investigation and did she do an investigation. ‘THE COURT: I'll allow him to re-cross. If you pursue that line of questioning, I don't guess he's objecting to it. But if he wants to ask her about what her findings were, we'll just redirect. So if he's not objecting, you can finish your question. If he wants to re-cross on that one issue, I’1] allow it. MS. CASHWELL: Okay. THE COURT: You may proceed. (Bench conference concluded) Q (By Ms. Cashwell) What T'm going to do is take20 a 12 13 14 4s a6 a7 18 19 20 an 22 23 24 216 it back a few steps, okay. When you are doing -- let me get to the I apologize for that. When you're doing an investigation, basically you have an accusation and you need to go and talk to a wide variety of people, including the alleged victim, correct? A. Correct. Q. Okay. And when you spoke to all of these witnesses, did any witness say, yeah, T saw her being abused? A. No. Q. Okay. But she said that something had happened to her, correct? A. Yes Q. And as a consequence of that, you put down verified findings; is that right? A, Correct. 0. Okay. So even if there's -- regardless of whether there's inconsistent statements by a child regarding what had transpired, if she said something happened, there's going to be verified findings; is that correct? A. Not necessarily, We also rely on the Child Protection ‘Team as well. 8 okay. And the Child Protection Team is the20 aL a2 13 u 15 16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2u7 Linda Kahl that does that video? A. Correct. @. And even if you have an accusation by a child but no medical findings and no physical findings that corroborate the allegations, that would still be a verified finding; is that correct? A. It can be, yes. Q. Now in this case, when you spoke to all of these witnesses, you made a statement that Shyane does not exhibit the signs of abuse or neglect; is that correct? A. ‘No, that's not correct. Q. what is the difference between that statement and verified findings? A. A child cannot exhibit signs of abuse nor neglect but still be a victim and still be verified findings. ° 9. For Stampie, when you go to the school or you're speaking to people in the community that have seen her, was there anybody that said, yeah, I saw signs of abuse? A. ‘The only thing that I can think of is that the mom said they were at a friend's house and the alleged perpetrator had come to the house that day. And they were about to leave, and the child ran back into the house but she didn't think anything of it. don't know that that's10 a 12 13 14 15 16 1 18 29 20 2a 22 23 24 25 necessarily a sign or not. But that's the only thing that r can think of, Q. So at school, there was no abnormal behavior or anything notated? AL No. Q. No bad grades or attendance problems? A. No. MS. CASHWELL: No further questions. THE COURT: I don't know at this point Mr. Gordon, do you have a question? MR. GORDON: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Is this witness free to go? MS, CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor. ‘TRE COURT: You're free to go. dust don’t discuss your testimony. Thank you. call your next witness, please. MS. CASHWELL: I call Danielle Levi. ‘HE COURT: Everybody okay on the jury? JURY PANEL: Yes THE COURT: Danielle Levi. (Pause in proceedings) THE COURT: Ms. Levi, you'xe still under oath. gust state your name again, please. THE WITNESS: Danielle Levi. THE COURT: Scoot on up. Keep your voice up. 21810 an 12 13 a 15 16 17 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 You may inguixe. WHEREUPON, DANIELLE LEVI, having been previously first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CASHWELL: Q. Ms. Levi, in the summer of 2009 and the spring of 2009, did zane Crowder live at your house? MS, CASHWELL: No further questions. THE COUR’ Mr. Gordon? MR. GORDON: Just briefly, Your Honor. (CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GORDON 0. Ms. Levi, is your prior testimony that he stayed at your house a lot and occasionally spent the night; is that accurate? AL Yes. No other questions. THE COURT: Is she free to go? Yes ‘THE COURT: You're free to go. Just don't, discuss your testimony. Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, I just need a 21920 uw 12 13 4 38 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 five-minute break. (THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, let me just ask again that you step in the back. and don't @iscuss your testimony -- any testimony, not your testimony, any testimony or any evidence at this point. Let me figure out where we're going, and I won't forget about an afternoon break, But just step back there for now. MS. CASHWELL. Your Honor, I take it back. My witness is available. I'm good. I'm sorry. ‘THE COURT: Okay. Have a seat, folks. MS. CASHWELL: It will be quick THE COURT: Who is your next witness? MS. CASHWELL: William Cody Davis. THE COUR: sorry. (Pause in proceedings) THE COURT: You're already under oath, so -- dida't I swear you in this worning. THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am. THE COURT: Have a seat. Pull on up. what your is your name? ‘THE WITNESS: William Davis. THE COURT: You may inguire. WHEREUPON, WILLIAM DAVIS, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as 2201 | follows: 2 DIRECD EXAMINATION 3 | BY MS. CASHWELL: 4 @. Do you go by Cody Davis? 5 AL Yes, matam. 6 Q. and how old are you? 7 AJ Tam ai. 8 Q. And what ie your relationship with zane 9 | crowder? 10 BR. He is my brother-in-law. My sister -- he has ean 11 | a baby by my sister. 2 Q. and what is your relationship with Abe Levi? 13 AL He was a friend, a mutual friend, from the old 14 | neighborhood. 15 Q. And what about Danielle Levi? 16 A, ‘That's his wife. 1 Q. I want to turn your attention to 2009. ae A Yes, ma'am. 13 Q. And in 2009, did you spend some time over 20 | there at the Levi residence? A. Yes, matam. I actually stayed with them for, I believe, two months. 23 Q What two months? 24 A. Honestly I couldn't tell you off the top of my f 2s | head.12 13 14 25 16 a7 18 19 20 an 22 23 2a [ waa Q Tell me a little bit about the layout of the house prior to the 1 know that they remodeled it -- but, prior to the remodeling. A. Tf you walk through the front door it’s a living room. Walk through, there's a kitchen, no doors. And then they have, I guess you would call it, a den to the right with no door. And then a laundry room, and then their bedrooms are in the back with Shyane's room and then Jaron's room, Q. And Jaron is her little brother? A, Yes, ma'am. Q. Were there other kids that were staying there over the sumer on a pretty regular basis? A, Oh, yes, ma'am, In and out. QO. What kids? Off the top of my head, J.R. Miller, Justin Beck, me -- there's so many. It's a neighborhood of friends. so I mean, they was running in and out Were you guys helping Levi -- or helping Abe with the remodeling of the house? A Yes, ma'am, kinda sorta sometimes. But he worked every morning, too. But I would also help Danielle clean or whatever she needed. Q. During the -- during 2009, did you ever see Zane Crowder baby-sitting the kids?10 a 12 13 a4 45 16 a7 a8 19 20 an 22 23 2a 25 A, No, ma'am, By himself, no, ma‘am. Q. And what do you mean by "by himself"? A. Usually it's -- the daughter, sara Levi, usually she's there all the time baby-sitting the kids. Me and Zane might have been sitting there with her, but she's baby-sitting the kids. Q and how old is Sara Lev: Who is she? A, She is the sister of abe, and I believe in ‘09 she would have been 16, 17. MS. CASHWELL.: T have no further questions, ‘Thank you. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Gordon? MR. GORDON: Just briefly, Your Honor. (CROSS-EXAMINATION BY NR. GORDON: Q. Mr. Davie, were you ever there -- a silly question, I know. But were you ever there when Zane was alone with the children? A. He was never alone with the children when T was there, no, sir. MR. GORDON: No other questions. THE COURT: Is he free to go? MS. CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor THE COURT: You're free to go. dust don't discuss your testimony. 22310 an a2 13 14 4s 16 a7 18 19 20 aa 22 23 24 25 Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASHWELL: Five minutes ‘THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, step in the back, Don't discuss your testimony. (gury out) MS. CASHWELL: We're going to testify, Your Honor. TEE COUR’ Raise your right hand, (Defendant sworn} THE COURT: Mr. Crowder, do you understand that, first of all, you've talked to your attorney about the advantages and disadvantages of testifying? ‘THE DEFENDANT: Yes, ma‘am. THE COURT: And you understand that you have the right to remain silent? ‘THE DEFENDANT; Yea, ma'am. THE COURT: That you don't have to testify? ‘THE DEFENDANT: Yes, ma'am. THE COURT: That if the State doesn't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, the verdict should be not guilty even if you don't present -- Z mean, you've had witnesses, but even if you don't testify; do you understand? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, ma'am. THE COURT: That's what I'll instruct then. 224.10 aa 12 2B 14 15 16 uy ue 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 You do understand that if you choose to testify, you're subject to cross-examination by Mr. Gordon just like Ms. Cashwell has been cross-examining. THE DEFENDANT: Yes, ma'am. THE COURT: And you've decided you want to testify? ‘THE DEFENDANT: I do. THE COURT: Let's bring the jury back in. You can float on up here to the stand. (Pause in proceedings) (dary present) SECURITY OFFICER: dury's in the box, Your Honor THE COURT: All right. ‘he defendant is present with Counsel. Assistant State Attorney is present. okay. Me. Cashwell, you've called your client, Zane Crowder, to the stand, You're under oath. state your name, please. THE DEFENDANT: Zane Crowder. WHEREUPON, ANB CROWDER, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CASHWELD: 225226 a Q. Siz, I know you're soft spoken. I£ you could 2 | speak up. What's your name again? 3 A. Zane Crowder 4 Q. And sir, how old are you? 5 A, ‘Twenty-three. 6 Q. Where do you live? 7 A. At the moment I live at the Queen Mary Inn, a [put my address is at 23 Gamwell Road. 8 Q. And how long had you lived there? 20 A. Bighteen to 20 years. 1 Q. Now, who is Abe Levi to you? 12 A. An ex best friend. : 3 Q. How close of a best friend was he to you? 14 A. Close enough that I would help him with 15 jeverything for free, you know. as @. And how long were you guys very close friends? aT A. Real close friends, probably about two to 18 | three years. 19 Q. Did you guys know each other when you were 20 | kids? A Well, I met him through my brother when I wae probably like 11 or 12. Q. That was your older brother that was Abe's friend? 1 25 A. Yes.20 un 12 13 1a 4s 16 u7 as a9 20 an 22 23 24 25 227 2 Now, I want to tum your attention to 2008. In 2003, aid you see Abe Levi pretty frequently? A. Yes. @. And how Exequently would the two of you see each other? ‘A. Almost every day. How far did he live from your house? A. About a mile. And what were you guys doing in the summer of 2009? A, I was helping him with working on cars and odd jobs. Q. And were you helping with the house as well, the renovations? A little bit. Not too much, though. Now, during that timeframe, did you ever bring your son over to Levi's house? AL Yes. Q. Okay. And while you were over -- you were visiting Abe Levi, did you ever go over there and babysit Shyane? a, Not alone. Q Who was usually present when you were baby-sitting -- not baby-sitting, but if you were there and she was being babysit?1 can tet wy oo cite 10 a a2 413 4 16 7 18 19 20 24 22 23 24 25 A. Justin Beck was there; Sara Levi was there; Cody was there a In -- going forward, did you help the family move from their house on Edison to another residence in 2009? outside? A, there. Q somebody name A, Q A Q ese -- this ite a grandmother's Yes, I did And where was that? ‘They just moved right up the street. what wonth was that? Was that like -- I really can't recall. Was it like November, December? was it cold I think it was getting cold. somewhere around Did you at any time spend the night at Christina's house? No, I did not Do you know somebody named Chris! na? Z know of her, but I don't really know her. and getting -- when you first became aware of accusation, how did you first become aware of The day that Abe showed up at my house -- my house knocking on the door and threatening me with these false accusations. 22810 an 12 13 14 1s 16 17 20 2a 22, 23 24 25 229 Q. Did you call him? AL Yes. Q. And did you talk to him? A. Yes, immediately. @, And what did you say to him? A. Well, T told him that whatever y'all are saying, you know, it's crazy. I would never do that to yall. @. Did you also talk to Jennifer Walker, a child protective team investigator? MR, GORDON: Your Honor, T'11 object to self-serving hearsay. ‘THE COURT: Sustained. Q (By Ms. Cashwell) without eliciting the hearsay, did you speak with Me -- don't tell me what you said, but did you speak to Ms. Walker? iatieeEcteve @. And did you also speak with the investigator, ‘tony Godwin? A. Yes, I did. Q. And when you were told the warrant came out, did you turn yourself in? RL Yes. Q. And then the bottom question that I am is on everybody's mind -- that's what this trial about -- did youa7 18 a9 20 au 22 23 24 25 ever touch Shyane in an improper manner? A. No, I did not Ms. CASEWELL: Thank you. No further THE COURT: Mr. Gordon? CROSS-EXAMINATION ©. Mr. Crowder, how old are you, s AL Dm 23 Q. And when is your birthday? A. 3/3/88 Q. And as you testified before, is it true you were best friends with Abe Levi? AL Yes. Q. And is it true that you were friends of Danielle and the entire family? A. Twas mostly friends with Abe, Danielle, she was just there, you know. I'd talk to her, but -- Q. 8 it true that you spent time at the house when Abe wasn't there? AL Yes. Q And all of that is true and well, did you spend time with them during the summer of 2009? A, Not too much. Q. So you didn't spend much time with them that 23020 an a2 13 14 15 16 a7 18 qs 20 22 22 23 24 25 231 year? A. Tmean, yes, I did. But, I mean, it wasn't a lot. ‘They were moving and all of that and they were in other houses, so, you know, so -- other people's houses. Q. Well, when they were living at the house on Edison Drive, did you stay with them there? A. I didn't stay with them. ©. Did you sleep over sometimes? A. Yes. @. And so you agree that ali of that information is true; is that correct? AL Yes, @. ‘The only thing that you're saying is not true is, one, that you were never there alone with Shyane; is that right? A. Correct Q. And that you never stayed at Christina's house; is that correct? A. That's correct. @. And though, yes, you did stay over sometimes to go fishing the next morning with Abe; is that right? AL Yes. Q. But -- and that you never touched Shyane; is that right? A. That's correct.heseorclt pss 10 FES a2 3 uM a5 as a7 ae 1s 20 21 22 23 24 28 Tais copur tACTIC Ba & Q. So you agree with all the evidence except for those things that could get you in trouble; is that correct? A. Can you restate that? Q. You agree with everything the witnesses said except for the things that could get you in trouble? No. I'm just telling the truth. MR. GORDON: No other questions. ‘THE COURT: Redirect? MS. CASHWELL: No redirect. Thank you, Zane THE COURT: You can step down. Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, at this time the Defense would rest. THR COURT: Mr. Gordon? MR. GORDON: Nothing further, Your Honor. THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, here's what we're going to do. We're going to give you your afternoon break. Im going to -- we're going to talk about jury instructions, so we'll try to do that as quickly as we can, but it's probably going to take us more than fifteen minutes. But when we bring you back in, we will go directly into closing arguments and jury instructions. Again, you can leave your notepads. They're 232 —!20 aa az a3 1a a5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 233 safe here. Still, you may think, hey, we've got all the evidence, but, no, you still can't talk about the cage, all right. So let's go ahead -- Mark, you can take them down for their break. I'll have Dave radio you a time roughly, but I think we'ze going to have to go over jury instructions, SECURITY OFFICER: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. (sary out) THE COURT: Let me quickly talk about something on the record. Prior inconsistent statements, which is 613 -- sorry -- 90.614. MS. CASHWELL: 614, Your Honor? THE COURT: 90.614. Tn the 2010 edition, it's 643, Essentially the way it's supposed to work is, the witness is given an opportunity to admit or explain or deny the statement. While Ms. Cashwell never walked up to the witnesses and said something like, look at the police report, is this what you said, I felt that she did say -- talk about Jennifer Walker, for example, taking notes and ask them certain questions, which I think thought set up the inconsistent statements. That's why I made the decision about allowing that. It may not10 a 32 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2 24 28 have been that she walked up and said here's the police report, but that she, I think, covered it ina different say. However, since we've been talking about that today, Mr. Gordon didn't object to this, but I just wanted to point it out, that my xeading of Ehrhardt is that the one statement that Mr. Gordon could have successfully objected to was the statement where you talked to Ms -- T don't know what her name is now ~~ but Ms. Walker about the child lying about the cigarette situation. Because Ehrhardt does say that if the child or the witness admits they made an inconsistent statement, you'ze not supposed to then ask MS, CASHWELL: ‘That's correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: So anyway, that was my E just wanted to clean up for the record that, while it may not have been done in exactly the way I felt, that Ms. Cashwell laid enough groundwork to make the comp, to do the inconsistent statements. But just for future reference, the child admitted today -- she admitted on the CPT video and admitted today, I didn't tell the truth about the cigaxette smoking. That should have been the end of it. 234a Us \& 235 1 MS. CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor 2 THE COURT: Let's talk about jury instructions 3 and verdict forms, I understand the Defense wants a 4 special instruction. 5 Why don't we go through -- let's go through 6 the State's instructions, and then I'11 find out what 7 Ms. Cashwell wants. Have you got a copy there, 8 Ms. Cashwell? s MS. CASHWELL: I do have a copy, Your Honor. 10 Yeah, I had printed it out. aa THE COURT: Okay, Tntroduction, statement, a2 sexual battery. And then you are -- I don't know is it : 13 a Category 1 for battery, Mr. Gordon, as a lesser? 4 MR, GORDON: It is a Category 1 for the sexual 15. battery, not for L and . 16 THE COURT: And battery is the lesser. a7 MR. GORDON: Yes, Your Honor. I believe that 18 Ms. Cashwell was asking for it. Or was that for Count 19 22 20 MS. CASHWELL: I don't think r'm allowed to an have it for Count 1. 22 THE COURT: 0 let's move to the lewd and 23 lascivious molestation, Count 2. 24 MS. CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor. 5 THE COURT: And then battery is not a Category10 an 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 236 1. Axe you asking for battery on Count 27 MS. CASHWELL: On Count 2 I'm asking for unnatural lascivious act as a lesser included. TEE couR Zs that special instruction? MS, CASHWELL: It's not special. THE COURT: Well is that the instruction we're talking about that's special in the sense that it's the extra instruction you're asking for? MS, CASEWELL: Yes, Your Honor. I'm asking for the misdemeanor battery, misdemeanor assault, and misdemeanor unnatural and lascivious act. THE COURT: Let me see what you've got. MS, CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor, This is from the supreme Court jury instructions. THE COURT: Is the State objecting to unnatural and lascivious act? MR. GORDON: Your Honor, just to clarify, Defense is asking for three lessers in regards to Count 22 MS. CASHWELL: Yes. MR, GORDON: All three different ones? MS. CASHWELL: Yes. MR. GORDON: And that's for attempt, assault MS. CASHWELL: No, not attempt. Assault,10 uw 12 13 uw 15 1s 1 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 237 battery, and unnatural lascivious act. THE COURT: Is unnatural lascivious act a first degree? MS, CASHWELL: Second degree. THE COURT: Then it should be battery, which is a first degree misdemeanor. MS, CASHWELL: Yes, THE COURT: Then either unnatural lascivious and assault, but it should be the highest degree. Do you have proposed language? Assault and battery are easy. What about unnatural lascivious act? Ms. Z cam get it. MR. GORDON: Your Honor, according to the instruction -- Ms. oh, Z gave it to him. MR. GORDON: -- it looks like Element 1 requests, in parenthesis, the defendant's name and then copy from the charge the allegation with the victim in regards to Count 1. So I would propose this is a lesser of lewd and lascivious molestation. MS. CASHWELL: Count 2. MR, GORDON: He did intentionally touch -- All of this whole sentence -- MS. CASHWEL! unlawfully and intentionally touch in a lewd and lascivious manner the breasts, genitals, genital areaLo an 12 13 Cover feet OAS ACRADY Messi uf. THE COURT: he court reporter, you're killing her. So either we need to talk about it and go back on the record, or we need to slow down, MR. GORDON: May I write my recommendation down? "HE COURT: Yes. Why don't you write it down and then let's see if Ms. Cashwell agrees with it. ‘Then maybe Lisa can help us. (Pause in proceedings) MR, GORDON: ‘Your Honor, I will -- I'm just trying to see the Defense's prima facie reason for the assault or battery. T understand both assault and battery as lessers. MS. CASHWELL: You understand that. So it's just the lewd and lascivious act. MR. GORDON; I understand the battery and the unnatural lascivious act. ‘THE COURT: What's the assault? MS. CASHWELL: Well, there has been testimony that allegedly he threatened her, that he said he would torture her. MR. GORDON: ‘That's true, Your Honor, No objection. Just for the Court's information, the elements 2381 Se erg eae ecg ee eer eee : | a instructions are: Element 1. Zane Crowder touched the 3 genitals or the buttocks or the clothing covering the 4 genitals or the buttocks of S.R.B. 5 Element 2, he act was unnatural and 6 lascivious. (ae IM COURT: that's a second degree 8 misdemeanor? 9 MR. GORDON: Yes, Your Honor. 20 THE COURT: Okay, so we'll do it -- a MS. CASHWELL: Did you think I had created it, 2 Your Honor? i 13 THE COURT; I did not think you had just made 1 it up, I was just surprised. 15 Battery -- are we going to do battery and then a6 unnatural and lascivious act and assault? or battery, | a assault, and umatural lascivious act? what's our 18 order? sattery ie going to be number one because it's a9 the first degree misdemeanor. 20 MR. GORDON: Your Honor, I would argue for ar severity. Go battery, unnatural to assault. { 22 MS. CASHWELL: That's fine. 23 THE COURT: Okay. So that will affect the 24 verdict form. We'll get to that in a minute. ‘Then we would do plea of not guilty,10 aw 12 13 24 15 16 a7 18 as 20 21 22 23 24 25 veasonable doubt. standard. Weighing the evidence. One through five are Six, money, preferred treatment; Mr. Gordon? MR. GORDON: No, not needed, Your Honor. ‘THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASHWELL: No, Your Honor, THE COURT: Pressure; threat, Mr. Gordon? MR. GORDON: Not needed, Your Honor. MS. CASHWELL: Agreed, Your Honor. THE COURT: Inconsistent statement. 1 think we'll give that. somebody Conviction of crime. heard no testimony. General reputation. No testimony unless blurts it out now. So it would be one through five, and then No 8 would become No. 6. Do you agree, Mr, Gordon? MR. GORDON: Yes, Your Honor. MS. CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Then we'll eliminate defendant not testifying. Rules for deliberation. cautionary instruction. Verdict. Single defendant, multiple counts. Submitting case to jury. 2a010 aa 12 a3 14 15 1s a7 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 on the verdict form it needs to be, on Count 2, guilty of battery; then guilty, unnatural and lascivious act; and then assault; and then not guilty. Does everybody agree? MS. CASHMEL: Yes, Your Honor, THE COURT: Mx. Gordon, how long -~ Ms. Cashwell, how long do you want for closing? MS. CASHMBLI Your Honor, to be on the safe side, because I'm not long-winded, T would like an hour and 40 minutes. THE COURT: know you're joking. How long do you want for closing? MS, CASHWELL: I really would like at least -- I would like to have an hour and 20 minutes. ‘THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor. This is a life felony. THE COURT: I know it's a life felony, Ms. Cashwell, and the evidence itself took about three hours to put on. So if you retestified, it would be hard for you to come up with an hour and 20 minutes. I don't even think an hour. MS. CASHWELL: Okay. THE COURT: I don't want to cut you off if you've got stuff to say, but I also think you want the 24%2o ua 12 13 24 1s 1s 17 18 29 20 22 22 23 24 25 jury to be fresh when they go back because lt is a life felony. MS. CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: How about 45 minutes? MS. CASHWELL; I will try, Your Honor, very hard. THE COURT: How about 45 minutes? MS, CASRWELL: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Gordon, 45 minutes more than plenty? MR. GORDON: Yes, Your Honor, that's adequate, THE COURT: All right. And my reason again, for the record, if there's even an appeal in the case, is the length of the evidence. And T have had an experience with Ms. Cashwell and I know that she can do it, and r don't want it to be a repetitive situation, So 45 minutes for each side. can you -- Mr. Gordon, I can give you a few minutes to huddle up with Lisa and maybe she can work on the changes. MR. GORDON: Yes, Your Honor, 1 need to note them, and it will take a minute. ‘THE COURT: And I'll need -- there's seven jurors -- eight, mine, 10, 11. But if you'll bring if Lisa can come back with one verdict form and one set 24210 an 12 13 1a 15 us 7 18 19 20 au 22 23 24 25 243 of jury instructions and let me look at them while they!re doing closings, then I'll ask you to make copies, if you don't mind. What I'm going to say is, I'll give y'all @ break until 0 and then we'll be back. Mr. Gordon, that gives you a few minutes, Is that good, 3:00? MR. GORDON: Yes. ‘THE COURT: We're on break until 2:00. (Recess) THE COURT: Okay. Well, if there's not any issues, let's bring the jury in. (Pause in proceedings) THE COURT: What sort of warning time do you want? MR. GORDON: Your Honor, I guess a 20-minute mark during my first so I'll try to keep equal time available. THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell, what kind of warning do you want? MS. CASHWELL: ‘Twenty and then five. THE COURT: When you've used 20. MS. CASHWELL: No, when I've used 25 and I've got 20 left. ‘THE COUR’ Gotcha.ao an a2 13 14 as 1s uw ae 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 244 MS, CASHWELL: It will take me that long to wrap my mind around the fact that I only have 20 left. THE COURT: It's very sad. I have every confidence in you, Ms. Cashwell, in your fine abilities. (Jury present) SECURITY OFFICER: Jury's in the box, Your Honor. ‘THe COURT: All right. For the record, defendant is present with Counsel. Assistant state Attorney is present. Ladies and gentlemen, both the State and Defense have now rested their case. The attorneys now present their final arguments. Please remenber that what the attorneys say is not evidence. However, do listen closely to their arguments. They are intended to aid you in understanding the case. Bach side will have equal time, but the State ig entitled divide this time between an opening argument and a rebuttal after the Defense has spoken Mr. Gordon, you may proceed. MR. GORDON: Thank you, Your Honor, May it please the Court, the Defense Ladies and gentlemen, we are here today\F pregecun cane THIS CAM Ifans Sig Ly ae Cie. fae io an a2 13 14 18 16 17 18 1s 20 2a 22 23 24 25 because Zane Crowder did something to gratify himself without considering the lifelong impact it would have on the child he touched. We are here today because of the things he did to an innocent young girl. Today is Shyane's day in court just as mich as it's Zane Cronder's day in court. Today ia Shyane's day for justice. Ladies and gentlemen, you've had the opportunity now to hear the evidence. The evidence supports Zane Crowder's convictions for his crimes. The burden has been met, and you can now strip him of his presumption of innocence and find him guilty as charged. Count 1 is the charge of sexual battery. To prove the crime of sexual battery upon a person less than 12 years of age, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt. Elements 1 and 3 correspond to the ages of the parties; Element 2 corresponds to his conduct. Element 1, §.R.£. -- and you'll notice on the jury instructions, and the Judge will further instruct you on all the jury instructions, and you'll each receive a copy of them. You'll notice on the copy that whenever Shyane is mentioned, referred to, due to the fact that she's a juvenile, it will be using her10 na 12 13 aa 45 1s uy 18 as 20 22 22 23 26 25 initials. So it reads: §.R.B., which stands for Shyane Rene Bilis, was less than 12 years of age. And ladies and gentlemen, you heard her testify to the fact that she was six when this first happened. she turned seven that June 7th of 2009. She was six and then seven when this happened. And that she was eight today, and that her birthday is Tune 7 of 2002, So Blement 1 is met. Blement 2 requires that you find that Zane crowder committed an act upon $.R.B., in which the vagina of Shyane, S.R.E., was penetrated by the defendant's fingers. And ladies and gentlemen, you heard clear, consistent testimony that his conduct included penetration of her vagina by his finger. Count 3 regards to the age of the defendant. rt requires that Zane Crowder was 18 years of age or older at the tine of the sexual battery. He testified to you that he's 23; that his birthday was January 3, 1988, All three elements have been proven to you today. Now, on the verdict form, and the judge will instruct you, there is the possibility that you find the lesser included offense. And the lesser included offense for today's sexual battery charge is simple battery, and simple battery requires only that you find 24610 an a2 23 14 1s 1s a7 ae 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 247 that he intentionally touched or struck S.R.E. against her will, ‘That's included because obviously he had to touch her in order to commit the sexval battery, and it was against her will. Ladies and gentlemen, the proper verdict is -- for each and every element that is met, and that is as charged, Elements 1, 2 and 3 of sexual battery have each been met. Count 2 corresponds to the lewd or lascivious molestation charge. I'll read you the elements for that charge. To prove the crime of lewd or lascivious molestation, the State mst prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt one, ‘That S.R.Z, was less than 12 yeare of age. Again, she said that she was six and then seven when this happened. two. Zane Crowder intentionally touched in a lewd or lascivious manner the genitals or the clothing covering the genital of S.R.E. ‘Three. Zane Crowder was 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. and consistent testimony today a that he touched her on the outside as well as on the inside of her private part. The words "lewd and lascivious" are defined prctny §10 a 12 13 a4 15 16 a7 18 as. 20 21 22 23 24 25 248 and they mean the same thing. They mean a wicked, lustful, uncheste, licentious or a sensual intent on the part of the person doing an act. You can use your nge_in determining his intent, whether or not he had a lewd or lascivious intent when he was touching the child on her genital area once again, there are lesser included offenses for this charge. And for lewd and lascivious molestation today, the lessers include battery, which is a touching against her will, committing an unnatural or lascivious act, which is another lesser crime ‘Those elements are -- I don't have them here in front of me, but the judge will read them to you. And they are less than the charge as -- the lewd or lascivious molestation charge. Clearly all of those have been met, but lewd or lascivious molestation is the proper charge. Furthermore, another lesser included offense, another smaller crime included within lewd and lascivious molestation is a simple assault, and the judge will read you that instruction. Ladies and gentlemen, you have had the opportunity today to hear the evidence, and you heard the entire situation from everyone who knew enough to testify. You heard from -- without a doubt, the most10 a a2 13 14 15 16 a as 19 20 aa 22 23 24 25 el Cc SAy feted the Lic ce WAS StA2TED.S 249 important witness that you heard from is Shyane Hllis Due to the nature of the crime, she and the defendant, Zane Crowder, are the only people that were there when the crime was committed. As the result of that, she is the only eye witness that testified to you fal about what happened. Due to the fact that tation.) does not happen in front of witnesses, she's the only one that can tell us what happened, and she said that today. She testified the best she could. In reality, you got to see her testify twice. You got to see her -- due to her age, you got to see the video of her initial interview with Cpr. You got to see her testify during that interview and you got to see her testify live today. Now, the Defense is trying to claim that a thorouga investigation wasn't done that and that law enforcement jumped to an arrest. Not only that, but that they always jump to an arrest whenever any allegation of sexual abuse is made. Neither argument is true. Law enforcement considers the same things you are to consider today and the same evidence you consider, which includes the testimony of the victim, the circumstances surrounding the allegation, the opportunity of the defendant to have access to the child, whether or not there is any reason for the child10 an 32 13 a4 15 16 17 18 1s 20 22 22 23 24 25 to, one, have the personal knowledge or life experience to make up an allegation like this, or, two, any motivation or any reason to make it up, lastly, the credibility of the witnesses. Ladies and gentlemen, you saw Shyane. You got to see her testify twice, first on the video and then live today. The first time, when she was on the video, she was seven; and then you get to see her testify again today, almost a year later. Ladies and gentlemen you istent. You're here to determine, in essence, if she is telling you the truth. The Defense is claiming that she's lying, but that is for you to determine. It's for you to decide, using your commen sense, if their arguments are reason to disbelieve Shyane's testimony. shyane told you twice what Zane Crowder did to her, two times almost a year apart, and her testimony was clear and it was consistent, She told you what happened, when it happened, where it happened, and who did it to her. She told you that most of the time it happened at her house in the den on the couch when Zane was there alone with her. He would make Jaron go to his room and watch TV or play. He would make her close her eyes, push her back on the couch and touch her underneath her panties on the skin of her vaginal area. 250ao an 12 13 1a 18 16 17 38 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 251 She said that, yes, he would touch her on the inside She algo told you that it happened one time at Christina's house when Zane came over and spent the night because he was going to go fishing with her step-dad the next day, she said that it's pretty much the same thing that happened when he came into her room at night, but at that time he didn't touch her on the ingide, he just touched her on the outside Ladies and gentlemen, you can use your common sense in assessing her credibility. First and foremost, consider her demeanor. You got to see with your own eyes the way she was acting when she told you today and when she testified on the videotape during hex first interview almost a year ago. You got to see how she answered the questions. Consider the consistency with which she maintained her story with all this time that has passed. And consider how important she took her promise to tell the truth. One thing for you to consider is about how seriously she took the promise to tell the truth is how she came clean over the fact that her mom smoked cigarettes and she saw her dad smoke a cigarette one time. She felt compelled to come clean on the fact that her mom smocked cigarettes. That's how important she took her promise to tell the truth. Consider thatao a 12 13 14 a5 16 a7 1a 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 252 on top of everything else in assessing her credibility. You saw today how she did her best to answer my questions and the questions of Ms. Cashwell, and consider how she would make corrections if we got anything wrong. She told you she remembered what happened and that she told you the way it happened, Those are just a few things you can consider in considering her credibility. obviously your recollections of the evidence is what is most important. And ladies and gentlemen, the CPT video is an item in evidence, and during your deliberations you do have the opportunity to xeview that video. so if you want to watch it again and consider the way she acted when she was telling Ms. Kahl about what happened, you can watch that video again. And please do if that will help you in making up your determinat So on top of Shyane's testimony, you have testimony from all the other witnesses, and what you get from them is corroborating testimony. They set up the circumstances surrounding the abuse. They show, first and foremost, the relationship that Zane Crowder had with Abe Levi and the Levi family. He was Abe's best friend. He was trusted, allowed in the house to sleep over whenever he10 an 42 13 14 4s 16 a7 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 2s ete CWSI NES TOTAL 253 wanted to, Everybody liked him. He was there all the time that spring and summer of 2009. He had the opportunity to be alone with Shyane. And then you also heard about the fact that he you heard from all of those witnesses that he did Christina's house. The only stay over that night al witness that disclaims any knowledge of staying the night as Christina's house is Zane Crowder. They also told you about the fact that Zane Crowder stopped coming around after that, and a period of time lapsed when Shyane never saw him. Shef felt jthat the abuse was NZ Ala Aisi tea The first time she did see him it shocked her over and didn't see him. and she xan back into the house. That triggered her memory and, two days later, she disclosed the abuse. So ask yourself in the mindset of a child if her reaction was reasonable and credible. ‘The testimony about all of the circumstances between all the witnesses was consistent between Ms. Webb, between Mr, Levi, Ms. Levi, even from the child. All consistent as to when he was there, how he was there, What he did when he was there. those things except for each little thing that would get him in trouble. mids Leaps Merle. es20 21 22 23 24 25 Ladies and gentlemen, also consider the ultimate question: Motivation. ‘The child had no motivation to fabricate this story. You heard the evidence. There's no indication of anything for her to gain out of this. In fact, everything is for her to lose, Her family liked and trusted and loved Zane Crowder. She had no reason to desire he get in trouble. First off, she's a child without the Imowledge of sexual conduct, without the life experiences with which to fabricate an allegation like this and, most importantly, no reason to do it. Making up the allegation did not gain her anything. and if a child lies, your common sense can tell you that they do it in order to gain something or get out of trouble. there's none of that evidence in this case. All it got her was this markedly unpleasant experience, the reality of the court process. she knew it would hurt her family. MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, objection. arguing facts not in evidence. ‘THE COURT: sustained. MR, GORDON: Your Honor, I do believe I can argue reasonable inferences. TAR COURT: T'm going to sustain the 25420 an a2 13 a4 as 16 a7 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 objection. MR. GORDON: Yes, Your Honor. hadies and gentlemen, use your common sense when evaluating the circumstances. You saw the demeanor of the witnesses when they testified, the emotional impact it had upon then, and the hurt they felt at the betrayal of this conduct. hadies and gentlemen, the judge will read you factors that you can consider, among others for you to consider, in determining the credibility of a witness. And those factors include, and T'11 read them to you: Did the witness seem to have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified? Two. Did the witness seem to have an accurate memory? Three. Was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys! questions? Four. Did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided? Five, Does the witness’ testimony agree with the other testimony and the other evidence in the case? And eight -- six. Did the witness at some other time make a statement that is inconsistent with the testimony he or she gave in court? ‘The ones that we need to focus on for today's10 a 12 BEY a 18 us a7 18 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 256 purposes include the fact that did they seem to have an accurate memory, You got to ses that when you saw the child testify. As well as was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys’ questions? You eaw the child when she was answering my questions and the questions of Ms. Cashwell. on the flip side, Mr. Crowder made himself a witness as well, and you can use the same considerations in determining his credibility as a witness. And did he seem to be trying to be honest and straightforward in answering my questions? Note how when I backed him into a corner and asked him akout the fact that he agreed with all the things that would not get him in trouble, but the only things he denied were the things that would get him into trouble, he didn't admit to that. ‘Also consider whether or not the witness has some interest in how the case should be decided when determining the credibility. That's obvious. and then, does the witness' testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case? All of the State's witnesses testimony was consistent, okay. Consistent in a wholly, relevant10 a 12 13 1a 35 16 17 1s 19 20 au 22 23 2a 25 257 way. Now the defense attorney is going to get up and point out a lot of minor things that she claims were said differently in the past. Keep in mind, when listening to her arguments, the state of the witnesses when they allegedly made the statement, who they made the statement to, and whether that statement, when it was recorded, was recorded with the intention of them being counted upon. Remember that those are statements made to people who are just showing up and taking a xeport. That's not testimony in court before you today. ‘The testimony that you saw with your own eyes, not gome other person's recollection, the testimony you saw with your own eyes, the child's testimony on her tape and the testimony before you today was entirely consistent. THE COURT: You've used 20 minutes. MR. GORDON: ‘Thank you, Your Honor. Consider that. Ladies and gentlemen, the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Not beyond all doubt or beyond the shadow of a doubt. The standard is a reasonable doubt You heard all the evidence that's available inLo aw 12 23 258 a case like this. You saw the child testify. The Defense is going to get up and tell you it's a he-said/she-said, and that's true due to the nature of the charge. But consider all those other things 1 pointed out when assessing the credibility of the witness, and use your common sense in determining who to believe. ‘The defendant will argue a lot of different things. During the arguments ask yourself, are those arguments convincing and do they give rise to a doubt that is reasonable? Use your common sense in evaluating it. In the end I'm confident you will be able to strip the defendant of his presumption of innocence éuly afforded in the court of law and find him guilty as charged. Thank you. 20 aa 22 23 24 ‘THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASEWELL: Thank you. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. 1 xemember ence, when I was flying into Hochiminh city, which is the southern part of Vietnam, and we got off of the airplane and we got to take a bus into the town. And from there, we got on a train, Super crowded. Everybody seem today have all kinds of wildlife on animals or whatever on that train, and we had to ride a20 a 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 a9 20 2a. 22 23 24 25 259 12-hour train all the way up to Soule When we got to Soule, one of the first places T wanted to go visit was where they kept the FOW's, the American soldiers, Prisoners of War. When I went to the Hanoi Hilton -- because that was the name of it. When I went to the Hanoi uilton, I saw this nice little plague, and on the side of the wall this little plaque said, "We treated our prisoners well," which was kind of funny because obviously they didn't. I have never in my life been to Vietnam. Not once, But I can take a tle bit of fact, and T can weave a story where I would fall apart is in the details. 1£ you asked me what currency they use in Vietnam, I have no clue. Tf you ask me what sort of immunization shots I needed to get to Vietnam, I'd have no clue Likewise, what you had before you today, Shyane, she had a little bit of a story that I guess she had a friend Morgan who sa‘! , I was touched down below, but we didn't have details because you can't create details. You can spin a story, but you cannot, £411 in what's missing. ‘Things as simple as a six-year-old child being digitally penetrated by an adult finger, and you're telling me no pain? You didn't hear her testimonyaT 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 260 saying, oh, yeah, he brought out vaseline; he brought out baby oil; he brought out something. You hear nothing about that, Yet she says it happened ten times; it happened fifteen times. No pain, No infections. No complaints to vem about, hey, something's not feeling right down there. No scar tissue. No hymen that's being penetrated. Nothing. It's in the details. The State Attorney says, well, why would a little girl make this up. The sad reality in the -- 1 don't know. Honestly, I don't know. Maybe she's not. getting enough attention at home, you know. Maybe she talked to her friend, Morgan, and Morgan, her friend, got a lot of attention after this happened. I don't know. But the bottom line is that what she has said is not consistent across the board. And one of the great ways -- this is the time we apply the law. One of the great ways that I use to analyze evidence is I use the law itself. You keep hearing the State Attorney saying use your common sense, use your common sense. That's like a euphonism for ignore the law, but we took an oath to follow the law. What the law says is that Mr. Zane Crowder is presumed innocent, the same presumption or as strong a20 a 12 13 4 a9 20 an 22 23 24 ee eee eee 261 presumption when you see her sitting behind the bench there with a black robe and you presume her to be a judge. What the law eays is that the state Attorney has to prove two thinge beyond and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt. One. ‘hat a crime was even committed. And two. He had is the person that committed it. What the law says ig that reasonable doubt can come from three sources. Tt can come from a the conflict in the evidence. It can come from a lack of evidence. Or it can come from a combination of both. okay, Conflict in the evidence, conflict in the evidence. she tells Ms. Webb, oh, yes, he touched my front private and my back private. Less than an hour later, she's telling her father -- stepfather, nope, just the front area. ‘hat's a conflict. That's « reasonable doubt. She tells Ms. Webb, oh, you know, he touched me there and penetrated me. She tells her father, he put objects inside of me and he held me down. she tells Ms. Webb, well, I think it was, you know, more than one time, but I don't know how many. She tells her father, it was ten times, And that's in one day and that's in one hour.20 aw 12 13 14 as 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 262 She tells Ms. Webb, it took place in the house; it was in the den. she tells her fathy x, it took place in four rooms. Two days later, by the time she gets to Gulf Coast Kid's House, she throws in another place. Christina's. When we are -- what we know and what we promise to do as jurors is weigh the credibility of the witnesses and when we look at the witnesses, that means whether they're adult witnesses or they're children witnesses, and we all -- everybody took a promise and said, yes, we understand that children can sometimes be untruthful for a variety of reasons. It's sad, but it happens, And they can be untruthful about sexual abuse, too. And just like my Vietnam story, when you start digging and you start looking at the details of what she's saying, that's when the truth starts coming out, And that's what the State Attorney doesn't want you to look at. He's, like, uh, ignore all of that. Just use your common sense. No, pay attention to that. Pay attention to something like her demeanor. You saw her on her videotape on March 17th when she was talking about this alleged sexual abuse. The devil's in the details. Because if she had actually been sexually abused, that was a heck of a demeanor for somebody who had been10 a 23 24 Lf sexually abused. And why is it that she already knew what questions would be asked? She said to the interviewer, aren't you going to ask me whether it's inside or outside? It's inside. Really? and it didn't hurt. You heard -- I'm going to go through. You know, we have conflicts in the evidence, and I'm going to go through those. But we also have lack of evidence. You heard from her mother, this -- and her father this story about in August of 2009 we were at Christina's and that's when he came over and went fishing and something happened. But do you remember the first officer that responded to the house on the 14th of March? He'd never heard about Christina's house, There was no mention of Christina's house. And do you remember when I asked him, I said, what was the range of occurrence that they gave you? They said it was April to June of 2 ‘There was no August, of 2009. And why was that? Because April to June of 2009, they were living at Edison Drive, They weren't living at -- if they were ever living there -- we don't know because we didn't hear from Christina. They weren't living wherever the heck they were supposedly living until August of '09 That whole story about Christina from them did not come forth until after shyane said on March 17th, ob, yeah, and it happened at Christina's house. - T : O Ft b,A wd 4A THe yesibe THING Te Prim qo CPS. (Niavhs Coty10 aa 12 13 14 15 a6 a 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 264 T want you to really, really look at that Ys videotape. Tf you remember at the very beginning of the videotape, the interviewer asked Shyane, do you remember the first time it happened? No. Really? That's not seared into your memory? The amells; what you were wearing that day; what you had done afterwards? Nope, don't remeber. Nonchalant. Well do you remember the last time it happened? What was her answer? Nope, don't remember the last time it happened. Really? That's not seared into your memory? And at this point the interviewer is saying, well, can you tell me about any incident? gust telling me something. And instead of giving her an incident, she says, hey, aren't you going to ask me if it was inside or outside? You got the answex to that. ‘Then she asked her -- after she says it was on the inside, she said, well, did it hurt? No, didn't hurt Didn't hurt one bit. Really? And then she asked Shyane, well, how many times was it? And remember, just two days previous she said ten time. Now she just pulls a number out of her head and says fifteen times. And then the interviewer asked her again, when -- do you remember the last time it happened, and that's when Shyane must have gone, cops, T guess I gave the wrong answer and comes up with the Christine story.20 a 12 13 14 1s 36 17 18 ag 20 24 22 23 24 25 265 And if you'll remember when Shyane was sitting on the witness stand and I asked her, I said, did you tell Ms. Webb that you were touched in the front and the back, do you remeber what her first answer under oath was? No, I dida't do it, xX didn't tell her front and back. So T asked her again, a second time, did you tell Ms. Webb that you were touched in front and back? and then she goes oh, yeah, one time. I forgot to mention it When you ask the child the same question multiple times what you're communicating is, that's not the right answer, give me something else. And that's nowhere nore evident than in thie video. You look at this video and you see the interviewer leave the room. And then she comes back and she goes, now, was there something else -- what did Zane say to you? He told me to shut my eyes. Did he say anything else? No. Did he say anything else? He told me to shut my eyes. Well, did he say anything other than shut ny eyes? No, Mell, did he say anything that he would do to you if you didn't shut your eyes? Oh, yeah, he'd torture me. You know, this is a child, and the interview techniques, that's why -- well, look at the video. Look at the video. Look at her demeanor, Look at how she’s responding to questions and ask yourself -- and use your comon sense. ‘You're six or seven years old, you're a little girl, and somebody has truly abused you, has trulyCbs S20 eae 21 2 2 24 fate abused you and put their finger inside of you and you can't xemenber what you were wearing, where it happened, time of the year, when it happened, what happened afterwards? ‘The State Attorney says, well, her memory was suddenly triggered when she saw -- allegedly saw zane Crowder at this house with some fellow named J.R, Millex, who, again, we haven't heard from him, And whatever house they were at, haven't heard from them, But that's not what Shyane said. When Shyane spoke with Ma, Webb, she never said, oh, yeah, and then I saw him and T was scared and that's why I'm thinking about this now. ‘That didn't -- uh-uh, that's not what Shyane said; that's what the state Attorney is putting in her mouth or trying to say. ae Did she say that to her father, to Abe Levi? No, she didn’t say that to Abe Levi. She didn't say it at all, She never said it. This is something that Danielle nevi, after everything transpired, stated and the state Attorney decided, well, I'm going to turn that into the triggering mechanism. But that's not what Shyane said, You heard -- and we will talk about the investigative process. Because you heard Investigator Godwin say that once a child makes an accusation like this against conebody, it doesn't matter if the child gives inconsistent statements, there's probable cause for an arrest. I asked him, well, does it matter if there's 266 | |10 a 12 B 14 1s 1s a7 318 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 absolutely no physical findings, nothing to support it? There's no torn hymen, scarring, infections, reports of pain, nothing that would make sense? No. Probable cause exists. T asked Ma. Walker, Jennifer walker, the Child Protection Team investigator, I said, well, verified findings, what are those? I mean, if the child is saying something and the child makes inconsistent statements, is it still verified findings? Yeah. How about if there's no physical injury? Yeah. It's sad, you know -- it's something that needs to be fixed, but there it ie, And that’s why it's so important, because how easy of an accusation is this to make? This is the easiest accusation in the world to make. He touched me. He touched me down there. we touched me in my privates. And after that, it's a snowball, And that's why it's so important to really pay attention to when things were said and what they were said because that's the only way to glean from the evidence whether you have somebody, a witness, that's being credible or not, And in this case, I'm just going to go through some of the things that you've already heard. I already told you about when she first at Webb's house and phe says front and back private area and at least one time. An hour later, she is saying that it was 267268 1 Jonly her front, that she was held down, that things were put 2 inside of her, and that it happened ten times, 3 I do not believe -- or the Defense does not 4 |believe for a second that Abe Levi got on this stand and was 5 untruthful. I don't believe it. From the Defense's 6 | perspective, Abe Levi was truthful. He said what he had 7 |been told, and that's what he had been told. 8 ‘Then you remember the next day that she speake 9 |with Ms. Walker on March 15th. When she speaks with 10 |Ms. Walker -- and remember she had told Abe that it happened 11 |in four rooms in the house. when she speaks to Ms. Walker, 12 | she saye it only happened in the living room i 13 ‘Two days later, the 17th of March, she gives a 14 | recorded statement. ‘This is when she says -- she brings the 15 | Christina house up, which has never been brought up before. Cos AT 1 | she save te bappenea fifteen times. and she said that she 17 |had never been touched anywhere other than her front. she ue | said, yeah, she lied to Jennifer but it wae because she was 19 | shy. 20 I don't know what you can tell from the video 21 | and from the child, but that is a very bright child, and I'm 22 |not sure how shy that child is, I'm not thinking too shy, 23 |but I'11 leave it to the jury's discretion 24 And that's the same video where she says, yes, 2s |and something like this happened to one of my friends. And13 4 1s 16 7 1s 19 20 an 22 23 24 25 269 that was a question that Mr. Levi had asked her. He had said, hey, look, this is serious. You've got to -- if you're mad at Zane about something, if one of your friends, you know, was talking about this or this is something that happened to one of your friends, I mean, you need to come clean. She said, nope, nope, nope, it happened. But we saw the video. ‘Then I wanted to touch on the medical aspect of this for just a second. Greenguist got up there and said, well, we just did a medical exam for the heck of it. And the State Attorney said, well, you didn't expect to find anything, you were just looking, right? Oh, yeah, yeah, we didn't expect to find anything. Come on. If they didn't expect to find anything, why would they have scheduled a medical exam? They had a six or a seven-year-old child who said that from the age of six to seven that she had been digitally penetrated by an adult male's finger, and that it had been happening for I don't know how long. But it happened at least ten to fifteen times, but they're saying they weren't looking for anything, If they weren't looking for anything, then why would they put the child through a vaginal exam and see an intact hymen? Wouldn't have done dt. Let's go even further outside of medical.10 az 12 13 ua 15 16 17 1s 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Let's talk social, okay, This child allegedly is going through this abuse. But when the child protective investigator goes to the school and chats with the counselor, talks to friends, talks to family members, grades are good, attendance is good, no xeported behavior. Nothing. Tt is the State's evidence -- or excuse me. It's the State's choice what evidence to show you, In other words, the burden of proof is on them. The burden of proof to prove, number one, that something actually happened, and, number two, that the person accused is the person that did it. They have to prove both of those things beyond and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt. They choose what evidence te present to you. They did not choose to present to you the initial officer that showed up at the scene. MR. GORDON: Objection, Your Honor. May I approach? THE COURT: All right. Counsel approach with the court reporter. (at the bench: MR. GORDON: Your Honor, that argument is not fair. T could not have presented that officer to testify to anything that was relevant. Anything I tried to have him testify to would have been objected to as hearsay, and this argument is unfair. a6 |10 na 12 2a 22 23 24 272 MS. CASEWELL:; It's not unfair. He could have called the initial officer -- they are always called -- and said range of occurrence, the time that things occurred, statements that were made. THE COURT: He could testify to hearsay, veally? MS. CASHWELL: He could testify as to what time he showed up. He could testify as to the range of occurrence. Yeah. THE COURT: All right. I'm going to overrule the objection. (Bench conference concluded) MS, CASHWEIL: The State has the choice of which witness to present. The State chose not to present the first initial officer, and you've got to ask yourself, well, why would the State not do that. The State didn't do that because it didn't mesh. It @idn't dovetail with the rest of their story. The xange of occurrence of 4/09 -- excuse me April of 2009 to June of 2009 did not match with the Christina new allegation for August of '09. The statements that were made to him as far as what had been told or reported by the child, that didn't mesh with what the child was later saying. so that witness was not called by the State; it had to be10 an 12 13 a7 18 19 20 an 22 23 25 272 called by the Defense The child protective investigator, the one that went out and did all of the investigation and talked to all of these people, Jennifer Walker, but she got married, and I can't remember -- Kumbrein or something. Kunbrein I believe ie her new name. But that person who did all of that footwork was not called by the State. That person had to be called by the Defense. Ask yourself, why was that person called by the Defense? Ask the State why that person had to be called by the Defense. Ask the State why they didn't call the initial officer that responded and took the report. Now, other testimony that was presented by the Defense was a person that lived there, Cody Davis. And d that he actually stayed there off Cody Davis testi: and on. That he was there during the summer of '09. That Zane Crowder was never alone with the children or baby-sitting the children. and I'm sure the state wants to say, oh, well, he's just not truthful. well you know what? You can't just make the claim, you've got to show me the proof. Show me where he was truthful. show me where the State Attorney was able to -- was cross-examining him and had to say, hey, what about this when you said this? There were no prior10 lu 12 13 1a 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 inconsistent statements. You heard Mr. Crowder take the stand, and Me. Crowder told you, yes, we were very, very close friends, Yes, I went over there to see Abe Levi. Yes, I lived with within a mile away. No, I did not do this, Did you see the State go up to Zane and say, well, what about this prior inconsistent statement? What about this prior inconsistent statement? pidn't happen. His statement has always been consistent. ‘The only witnesses in this trial that have regularly been shown inconsistent statements are the State witnesses, including Shyane and Ms. webb and Mr. Levi. You cannot fit a square peg in a round hole, and that's what the State is trying to do. You can't do it. The truth's the truth. That's just it, The truth's the truth. You can't fit a square peg in a round hole. ‘The State will come up here and argue to you that all of these inconsistencies don't matter. Who cares about these inconsistencies? Because in the end Shyane said something happened. But that's not the law, and we all took a promise to follow the law. and the law says that if there are inconsistent statements,274 a there's a conflict in the evidence, there's a lack of 2 evidence, or a combination of both, then there is a 3 reasonable doubt and you shall find the defendant not 4 guilty. 5 ‘The state tries to say well, you know, ask the 6 Defense why she's being untruthful. I'm not a psychic 7 and I'm not God, and I cannot get into a little 8 eight-year-old girl's head. TI can only surmise that 8 maybe she needed some more attention. I don't know. 20 But that is not the question. The question a here and what you've been -- you've sworn to do is ask 2 yourself if the State has proven beyond and to the 13 exclusion of a reasonable doubt two things: That ' 14 something actually happened, and that the accused is 15 the one that did it. What the Defense is asking you to do is follow the law and return a verdict of not guilty. Thank you. TAR COURT: Mr, Gordon, you may proceed. MR. GORDON: Ladies and gentlemen, the Defense is alleging that Shyane made this all up. That's what they want you to believe. Just ask yourself why. 1 couldn't tell you, but believe it anyway. ladies and gentlemen, the Defense practically ignored her testimony and, I don't know if you noticed, but never even called her by name, Her name is Shyane.10 a 12 13 a4 358 16 a 20 2a 22 23 24 25 The Defense is playing backseat quarterback and thing their own life experiences and interpreting what a perfect witness, an adult, mature, experienced witness -- MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, objection. TE we may approach. THE COURT: Counsel approach quickly with the court reporter. You need to stand for objections. (at the bene! MS. CASEWELL: He is asking, them to apply different rules for judging the credibility of witnesses. And the argument that he's making right now is you should judge a child differently, and that's not what the law says, What the law says is that you apply those same rules for judging the credibility of a witness or child as you do for an adult. THE coURT: Well, I'm going to overn the objection. You can proceed. Let the court xeporter get settled. (Bench conference concluded) MR. GORDO! The reality of the circumstances ie the witness is @ child. she was seven when she gave her interview, and she was eight when she testified today. The Defense ignored some of the small things 27514 15 16 a7 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 that she said, things that a child would say. First off, she made the disclosure using childlike terminology. She didn't even have a word for her private parts other than her private part. she disclosed as a child would disclose, and you can consider that when assessing the credibility of her disclosure. She told you that her understanding as to why they were there wasn't to create evidence so that it could be used in court later on. She's a child. She thought they were there because she had a doctor's appointment to see if she had gotten hurt. She saya that on the video. It's a child talking, She told you that it did not hurt when he touched her on the inside. she commented when she said he cares about me but I don't know why he did that, talking about Zane Crowder. Little things like that, that the child said throughout the interview. ‘The Defense is claiming that there's thinga that she didn't say, she did not include details. That's not true; she did. She told you what she was wearing that last time, the time she remembers the best when she was at Christina's house. She was wearing shorta and a robe that had the instructions on how to brush her teeth. You can use your recollection of the10 aa 12 1B 4 15 16 a7 18 277 evidence in considering the small things she said. You got to ses the child's testimony, and the Defense is ignoring the strengtha of her testimony and, imstead, resorts to arguing only to inconsistencies created from hearsay statements about what other people think they heard the child say. Those are the only sources of any alleged inconsistencies, what other people vemember what they think the child said. and you ask yourself, is that reasonable? You got to see the child testify and what you know she said was consistent. For an example is the alleged inconsistency that Ms. Cashwell is talking about from the first officer, the responding deputy, the responding report: taker who took a report and then furthered the case to investigations. Not a fair argument. The mother hadn't even had the opportunity to speak with the child f pick out perfectly explainable and realistic lapses in people's understanding based on hearsay. And along those same lines -- MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, objection ‘mg court: overruled. MS, CASHWELL: Thank you. MR. GORDON: Along those same lines, the10 an 12 13 14 as 1s a7 18 ag 20 2a. 22 23 25 Defense argued that I chose to hide evidence from you when I didn't call that officer as a witness. MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, objection. MR. GORDON: I have the right to explain this. THE COURT: Overruled, overruled. MR. GORDON: That is unfair and untrue. hadies and gentlemen, there are rules of evidence and I was following the rules of evidence in determining which witness is relevant to testify before you, okay? and is not admissible evidence -- MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, objection. THE COURT: Overruled. MS. CASEWELL: Yes, Your Honor. MR, GORDON: It's not admissible evidence to have those witnesses testify to all the things that were said that were consistent, okay? Unfair argument And it's convenient for the Defense to argue that. Consider the reasonableness of all the Defense's arguments in light of that, All those witnesses mew is what they were told by other people. They didn't have any understanding on their own of what had happened. ‘The Defense made some representations about the investigative process. That's not the whole truth either.20 an 12 13 14 as 16 uv as as 20 an 22 23 24 25 278 MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, objection, based on the notion in limine. THE COURT: Overruled. MR, GORDON: The Defense told you about all the things that are ignored when determining whether or not to make an arrest, but that doesn't consider all the things that aren't ignored. and it doesn't consider the whole truth. And ladies and gentlemen, the whole truth ie everything you're seeing here today, all the different considerations, all the different factors, the things for which you base your judgments oa credibility upon. If it was true as the Defense claims, then why are we here? Why are we having a trial over just some statement thrown out of the blue? Yes, due to the nature of the offense, there aren't any eye witnesses to cases like this. There are never surveillance videos of molestation happening. The only witness is the child, That is the reality. But you know the evidence is available, all of it, and you kmow that there's no evidence of any motivation to lie. And in the end, that’s what the Defense wants you to believe, and there's no reason why the child would lie. The Defense is trying to make you believe that Shyane lied and has lied the whole time throughout this10 a 12 13 1 15 16 a7 as 19 20 entire process for no reason. And moreover, that her family is lying about the time Zane Crowder stayed at Christina's house, about how she reacted to seeing him for the first time after so long, and how she acted when she disclosed the abuse to them. Ladies and gentlemen, none of the Defense's arguments give rise to xeasonable doubt. ‘They are all realistic and explainable and convenient for the Defense to azgue. The unfortunate fact is, yes, time had passed before she disclosed due to whatever pressures children feel waiting to disclose. And that that she had time to heal p And she told you in the first place that it didn't hurt. That means there never would have been any scar tissue created to have been eeen months later. In the end, this case comes down to credibility. The child's testimony in light of all the other testimony, all the other testimony that meshes and corroborates versus the only testimony that contradicts, the testimony of the defendant which you can apply the same rules to. Ladies and gentlemen, there's no reasonable doubt in this case. In the end, the proper verdict is guilty as charged. ‘Thank you. ‘THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, Court 28010 at | 12 23 Er | as 1s ro] 18 \1s 20 ery 281 Security is going to hand out jury instructions for you. Please wait and we'll read them altogether. Members of the jury, T thank you for your attention during this trial. Please pay attention to the instructions I'm about to give you. Zane Crowder, the defendant in this case, has been accused of the crimes of sexual battery, victim less than 12 years of age and lewd or lascivious molestation, victim less than 12 yeare of age. To prove the trial of sexual battery upon a person less than 12 years of age, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: Nunber one. S.R.E. was less than 12 years of age Number two, Zane Crowder committed an act upon $.R.E. in which the vagina of $.R.E. was penetrated by the defendant's fingers. Number three. Zane Crowder was 18 years of age or older at the time of the sexual battery. In considering the evidence, you should consider the possibility that although the evidence may not convince you that the defendant committed the main crime of which he is accused, there may be that evidence he committed other facts that would constitute a lesser included crime. Therefore, if you decide that“ © 10 uw a2 3 aa 15 16 a7 18 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 the main accusation has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you will next need to decide if the defendant is guilty of any lesser included crime. The lesser crime indicated in the definition of sexual battery is battery. To prove the crime of battery, the state must prove the following element beyond a reasonable doubt Number one, Zane Crowder intentionally touched or struck S.R.E. against her will. count 2 is lewd or lascivious molestation, victim less than 12 years of age. To prove the crime of lewd or lascivious molestation, the State mist prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: Number one. §.R-E. was less than 12 years of age. Nunber two. Zane Crowder intentionally touched in a lewd or lascivious manner the genitals or the clothing covering the genitals of S.R.B. Number three. Zane Crowder was 16 years of age or older at the time of the offense. ‘the words lewd and lascivious mean the same thing and mean a wicked, lustful, unchaste, licentious or sensual intent on the part of the person doing an acts. 28210 a 12 13 aa 35 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 283 And then the lesser included crimes under this are: Battery, which has already been defined. Committing an unnatural and lascivious act. To prove the crime of committing an unnatural and lascivious act, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: Number one. Zane Crowder touched the genitals or buttocks or clothing covering the genital area or buttocks of $.R.E. Number two. The act was unnatural and lascivious. Unnatural means not in accordance with nature or with normal feelings or behavior. Lascivious means a wicked, lustful, unchaste, licentious or sensual intent on the part of the person doing the act. Assault is also a lesser. Zane Crowder intentionally and unlawfully threatened, either by word or act, to do violence to S.R.E. Number two. At the time Zane Crowder appeared to have the ability to carry out the threat, Number three. The act of Zane Crowder created in the mind of 8.R.B. a well-founded fear that the violence was about to take place. ‘The defendant has entered a plea of not10 a 12 43 14 4s 16 17 18 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 284 guilty. This means you must presume or believe the defendant is innocent. ‘The presumption stays with the defendant as to each material allegation in the information through each stage of the trial unless it has been overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt To overcome the defendant's presumption of innocence, the State has the burden of proving the crime with which the defendant is charged was committed and the defendant is the person who committed the crime. The defendant is not required to present evidence or prove anything. Whenever the words reasonable doubt are used, you must consider the following: A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary or forced doubt. such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. on the other hand, if, after carefully considering, comparing and weighing all the evidence there is not an abiding conviction of guilt, or, if, having a conviction, it is one which is not stable but one which wavers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt and you must find the10 aa 32 13 aa a5 16 a7 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 285 defendant not guilty because the doubt is reasonable. it is to the evidence introduced in thie trial and to it alone that you are to look for that proof. A reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant may arise from the evidence, conflict in the evidence or lack of evidence If you have a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty. If you have no know reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty. Tt is up to you to decide what evidence is reliable. You should use your common sense in deciding which is the best evidence and which evidence should not be relied upon in considering your verdict, You may find some of the evidence not reliable or less reliable than other evidence. You should consider how the witnesses acted as well as what they said, Some things you should consider are: Did the witness seem to have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified? Did the witness seen to have an accurate nenory? Was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys! questions?10 1 12 43 14 15 1s 17 a8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 286 Did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided? Does the witness' testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case? Did the witness at some other time make a statement that is inconsistent with the testimony he or she gave in court? You may rely upon your own conclusion about the witness. A juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence or testimony of any witness. The defendant in this case has become a witness, You should apply the same rules to consideration of his testimony that you apply to testimony of other witnesses. ‘These are some general rules that apply to your discussion. You must follow these rules in order to return a lawful verdict You must follow the law as it is set out in these instructions. If you fail to follow the law, your verdict will be a miscarriage of justice. There ie no reason for failing to follow the law in this case, All of us are depending upon you to make a wise and legal decision in this matter. The case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the testimony of the10 12 23 14 15 16 a7 18 39 20 a2 22 witnesses and have seen in the form of exhibits in evidence and these instructions. ‘The case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for anyone or are angry at anyone. Remember, the lawyers are not on trial. Your feelings about them should not influence your decision in this case. Your duty ia to determine if the defendant nas been proven or not in accord with the law. It is the judge's job to determine a proper sentence if the defendant is found guilty. whatever verdict you render must be unanimous, that is, each juror must agree to the same verdict. Tt is entirely proper for a lawyer to talk to a witness about what testimony the witness would give 4£ called to the courtroom, The witness should not be discredited by talking to a lawyer about his or her testimony. Your verdict should not be influenced by feelings of prejudice, bias or sympathy. Your verdict must be based on the evidence and on the law contained in these instructions. Deciding a verdict is exclusively your job. cannot participate in that decision in any way. Please disregard anything I may have said or done that made10 a 32 13 14 15 1s 17 1s 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 you think I preferred one verdict over another. You may find the defendant guilty as charged in the information or guilty of such lesser included crimes as the evidence may justify or not guilty. TE you return! a verdict of guilty, it should be nor the highest offense which has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If you find that no offense has een proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then, of course, your verdict must be not guilty. only one verdict may be returned as to each crime charged. The verdict must be wnanimous, that is, all of you must agree to the same verdict. the verdict must be in writing and for your convenience I've got a form -- y'all don't have this. There's only one verdict form. I have it up here. Tt has the style of the case. We, the jury, find as follows that zane crowder, as to the offenses charged in the information: count 1. Guilty of sexual battery, victim less than 12 years of age as charged in the information. or guilty of battery, a lecser included offense. ox not guilty. Check one. Move on to Count 2, Guilty of lewd or lascivious molestation, victim less than 12 years of age as charged in the information, or guilty of battery, a lesser included offense. or guilty of 28812 13 u as 1s a Hite | a 20 i | 22 a as t 25 289 committing unnatural and lascivious act, a lesser included offense. Or guilty of assault, a lesser included offense. Or not guilty. ‘Then there's a place for the foreperson to write their name, sign it and date it. Let's flip to the next page, A separate crime is charged in each count of the information and, although they have been tried together, each crime and the evidence applicable to it must be considered separately and a separate verdict returned as to each. A finding of guilty as to one crime must not affect your verdict as to the other crimes charged. In just a few minutes you will be taken to the jury room by Court Security. The first thing you should do is elect a foreperson who will preside over your deliberations like a chairperson of a meeting, It de the foreperson's job to sign and date the verdict form when all of you have agreed on a verdict in thie case and to bring the verdict back to the courtroom when you return. Your verdict finding the defendant -- of course, I don't think it's in here, but either a man or @ woman can be a foreperson. Your verdict finding the defendant either guilty or not guilty must be unanimous. The verdict20 an 12 13 ue 15 1s 17 18 19 20 an 22 23 24 25 must be the verdict of each juror as well as the jury as a whole In closing, let me remind you that it is important that you follow the law spelled out in these instructions in deciding your verdict. ‘There are no other laws that apply to this case. Sven if you do not like the laws that must be applied, you must use them. For two centuries we have lived by the constitution and the law. No juror has the right to violate the rules we all share. Any objection to the instructions as given, Mr. Gordon? MR. GORDON: No, Your Honor THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASHWELL: No, Your Honor. ‘THE COUR: I'll ask the clerk to file a set. A couple of things. We're going to send the CD back with you, which is the one exhibit. You really can't just put it in your brain and look at it, If you need to watch it again, you just need to let us know and we'll reassemble and watch it on the screen. Second thing. We have an alternate, Before 1 send y'all back to deliberate, I always ask, does everybody feel okay? Is everybody able to deliberate? Zive actually had cases where strange things have20 aa a2 43 4 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 happened. Is everybody okay? SURY PANEL: Yes. HR COURT: ¥redna, will you identify our alternate, please? ‘THE CLERK: It's James Wilhite. THE COURT: Mr, wilhite, you're our alternate. Do you have everything with you that you brought today? Ts it out here with you? ALTERNATE JUROR: Yes. THE COURT: I want to talk to you for a few moments, okay? So if you'll sit tight, I'l] ask that everybody can go back and you can start deliberating, okay? And let me say one final thing, and you can go ahead and be standing up. T sometimes think that jurors think, I have about ten questions for the judge ‘here's a reason we send the instructions back with you. Stop and re-read those instructions, okay? I think they'll give you everything you need. Thank yiall. You can take your notepads back. Thank you. (gury out at 4:30 p.m.) _THE COURT: Everybody can just have a seat. THE (we, weamive, } aten'e got the pleasure of dncerscving with you on Monday because I was interacting with a separate group, but I want to thank you. 29110 a a2 a3 14 415 as 17 18 a9 20 au 22 23 24 25 We have an alternate because there's times when people don't show up, and T have even had trials where people got sick in the middle of trial. And obviously, you know, we want to make it work when we've got everybody assembled, the witnesses ready to go. I appreciate the close attention you paid today. Now do you have certain rights as jurors. One is that first of all, this will count as your jury duty for at least a year. You don't have to talk to anybody about the case, but you can if you want to. That's up to you. You now are free to talk about it. And the attorneys -- if you bump into the attorneys, they will not approach you, but I always like to reintroduce them, Because when I was practicing law, sometimes a juror might call me and I always found what they had to say helpful because it's hard to know what ylall are thinking. $0 Matt Gordon works for Bill Eddins, who's you're elected state Attorney, But Mr. Gordon is located, not surprisingly, at the Gulf Coast Kid's House. Patrece Cashwell is in private practice and she is in the phone book. So if you want to call her, that's fine. on behalf of myself, Assistant State Attorney, 292| | ae | or | as | 14 | 7 18 i. | at : | 23 293 Defense Attorney and Defendant, we thank you. wWe'xe going to get he checked out TE you want to know what the verdict in the case is, I'm Judge Shackelford. I'm in the blue pages, and you can call my office on Monday and they should know what the verdict is. Okay? ALTERNATE JUROR: Yes, ma'am, ‘THE COURT: ‘Thank you. Good luck to you. ALTERNATE JUROR: Thank you. (Alternate juror out) THE COUR’ All right. Mr. Crowder, are you satisfied with the defense -- your defense in this case? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, ma'am, "IE COUR: Is there anything that your attorney did that you didn't want -- set aside my rulings. That's a separate issue. Is there anything that she did that you didn't want her to do? THE DEFENDANT: No, ma'am Is there anything that she didn't do that you wanted her to do? THE DEFENDANT: No, ma'am. THE COURT: We need to take up something else before I get on to other matters, so just have a seat.16 a7 18 19 20 22, 22 23 24 25 Ms. Cashwell, I gave you the benefit of the doubt on something. Mr. Gordon -- you started talking about the State could have called the responding officer; they didn't. Mr. Gordon objected. we approached the bench and he said, Judge, I couldn't have called that witness because mich -- he didn't say it exactly this way. But the point that I got from him is that most of what he had to say was hearsay, would not have been admissible, and would you have objected to the officer getting up there and testifying to all of the hearsay. You said, Judge, he could testify to the time of xesponse and range of occurrence. I don't know that he could testify about range of occurrence without it being heargay, but I certainly thought he could testify to the response time, the demeanor of witnesses and what he found when he came to the scene. so I said I'm overruling the objection. Wow here's my beef. You then went and got up and stood up there and talked about that the fact the State didn't call this because it didn't comport with their version of the case, and the statements that came owt did not comport with the version of the case. MS. CASHWELL: It didn't, Your Honor. When. you look at it -- see, this is my problem. When % he said, Gordon got up there and he testified 29410 a 12 13. uw 35 16 ur 1s 19 20 an 22 23 24 25 well, that's not fair because Danielle hadn't even talked to the child. What he left out was that Abe Levi had spoken to the child and that Abe Levi was making representations to the officer about what the child said THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell, you're missing my point. My point is that Mr. Gordon's objection was well taken except -- if he had called that officer and said, tell me what the mother said. objection, hearsay. ‘Tell me what the father said. Objection, hearsay, ‘Tell me what Terrie Webb said. objection, hearsay. His point was well taken. I gave you the benefit of the doubt because it is true that the officer could have testified to the scene and a few other little things. And then after he raised that concern that he could not have called and gotten those statements in hig case in chief, you went up and in closing made the statement and directly said he didn't want to call him because those statements contradict, and that's why he didn't call them. MS. CASHWELL: They did. and, see, he called Abe - THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell? MS. CASEWELL: Well, let me just say one thing. He called Abe Levi and said Abe Levi is a 29510 an a2 2B 14 15 1s uv 18 a9 20 au 22 23 2 25 witness for child hearsay. You remember the child hearsay? At the child hearsay hearing, he said that these are statements that the child made to Abe Levi, right? And then those statements were admissible as child hearsay under, what is that, 803.23? So those were admissible hearsay statements because those were allegediy the same statements that were then given to the officer when the officer first responded, which would have been Dickin. THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell, if that officer had testified in the state's case in chief and gotten on the stand and said -- because do let us know for future xeference. I'm sure Mr. Gordon will pass the word down the line at the State Attorney's Office. If he puts the responding officer on the stand to testify what the father says and the mother said the kid said to her, you weren't going to object as hearsay? MS. CASHWELL: Depending on his order of witnesses. But if it was first, yeah, I would have objected. THE COURT: So then you went back, after Mr, Gordon said here's my concern, and you didn't just drop the subject. You made your point. I gave you the benefit of the doubt. You walked back up to that podium and then made -- in my mind, you said ne didn't 29610 a 12 13 a 15 1s a7 18 1s 20 21 22 23 24 25 call that -- I don't have the exact words, but I jotted notes down he didn't call that witness because those statements would have been contradictory to his case. MS. CASHWELL: They would have been. His case was -- THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell, quit arguing on a side point. MS, CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor. ‘THE COURT: You know what my point is. MS. CASHWELL: I veally don't. I really don't. ‘THE COURT: My point is, how is that in comportion with your ethical obligations when he said up here, Judge, this is my concern, It's a misstatement to say T could have called that witness and put those statements in. and you said, Judge, he could have testified te the day, the time, thie, that and the other. Okay, benefit of the doubt. Then you walk up and start talking about the very statements that he's concerned about. How ig that not a misstatement? MS, CASHWELI ‘That was not a misstatement because the whole point of bringing Dickin up there was for the range of occurrence from April of '09 until dune of 109. 29710 a 13 4 15 1s 18 1s 20 2a 22 23 25 298 THE COURT: And that's based on hearsay. How did he get that pt through hearsay? MS, CASHWELL It was a prior inconsistent statement. You had Abe Levi saying, no z THE COURT: Ms. Cashwell, please qui mean, I'm not that dense. You got my point. My point is, Mr, Gordon gaid exactly here's my beef, Judge. And I gaid, well, you could have called the officer for a couple of things. But other than that, if he had called that officer, I cannot believe that you would have let all of that hearsay cone in through the state's case. ‘Then you got up there and made exactly the point that he was objecting to, Do you feel that comports with your ethical obligations? MS. CASHWELL: I don't think that I aia anything wrong. I wean, that's where I'm seriously not understanding, TI really in wy mind when we went THE COURT: How could you look at me, Ms. cashwell, and say -- you understood it at the bench what he was saying MS, CASHWELL: At the bench what I understood was that you were overruling his objection -- THE COURT: Because you said, Judge, the officer could have testified to time he responded anda0 a 12 2B a4 15 16 aT 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 range of occurrence, Now, T don't agree that range of occurrence -- he could have because it's hearsay, But time, and then in my own brain, f added the officer can testify to the demeanor of the people when he found them. Z £illed in a few things. That's what you said, he could have testified to that. I, said okay, overruled. ‘Then you walked -- I didn't say, okay, yes -- you didn't say, yes, Judge, he could have testified to all of those statements. That wasn't your argument. Your argument was he could have testified to these details. 1 said, okay. You walked back up and talked about the statements. That's my beef. MS. CASHWELL: Okay. HE COURT: Now, do you feel like that comports with your ethical obligations? MS. CASHWELL: Your Honor, I really -- I'm having a tough time with this one because I really don't -- when I went up there, what I tock away from the bench -- and I'm not trying to give the Court a hard time. But what I took away from the bench was that I could go forward talking about whether the state did or did not call a witness. and that that is their choice, whether they present this evidence or that evidence. And then what I did target, when T was 29920 un 12 13 14 15 16 22 23 24 25 talking about Dickin, was that range of occurrence. Because the whole thing that I kept hammering home during my closing arguments was that the whole issue with Christina didn't come out until after the ceT video on the 17th of Marc! And then subsequent to that, that's when we have all of these statements about Christina, and then the dates change and it's August of "09. But -- ‘THE COURT: You did mention range of ecourrence. You didn't say boo about Christina, and his objection was clear. and, quite frankly, I'm very @isappointed in you and I'm hot about this. I'm cooling off because I think it was clear at the bench and I gave you the benefit of the doubt and really, if you had just walked up there and moved on, we wouldn't have had a beef. But immediately -- and you can ask Patrice at some point; I don't want to ask her to do it right now because she'11 Kill me -- to read back what you then said as soon as you walked back, that might be helpful in understanding my -- MS. CASHWELL: I'll look at it, Your Honor. I apologize to the Court, but I didn't mean to do anything that would -- TSE COURT: And that's why I gave Mr. Gordon0 a 12 13 14 1s 16 17 18 19 20 2a 22 23 24 25 MS. CASHWELL: -- make the Court hot. ‘THR COURT: Are you finished? I didn't mean to cut you off that time. MS, CASHWELL: I said I apologize for making the Court hot. I didn't mean to do that. I just misunderstood then, apparently. THR COURT: I would ask that you, and if Patrice doesn't mind at some point, review it. MS. CASHWELI Yes, ma'am THR COURT: Now that was why I gave Mr. Gordon extra latitude on his rebuttal. Because I felt like there was -- that was not my intention at the bench, MS. CASHWELL; I was going to ask the Court because I didn't understand the latitude. THE COURT: ‘That was why he got the latitude. All right. Now that I've moved off that subject, thank you. Ms, Cashwell, if we can take a couple of pleas. I know you've got a client that you want to deal with. MS. CASHWELL: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Have they said they want to see the video? 302 SECURITY OFFICER: Not yet