AMR 0,7 3967 a 1 STATE OF MICHIGAN 2 IM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF MECOSTA 4 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OP MICHIGAN = Eeas File No: 95-3702-F¢ SEVIN LYALL TOWSR, 7 Defendant. # 3 19 ‘JORY TRIAL - VOLUME XV of XVE i BEFORE THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE C. R00T, CIRCUIT JUDGE 12 Big Rapids, Nichisan - wadnesday, October 9, 1995 13 14 APPEARANCES: 15 JOAN 3. SULLIVAN, Assistant Prosecuting is Attorney On benalf of the People ui DAVID A. DODGE On behalf of the DefendantINDEX STTNESSES: RHONDA HAVENS ect Examination by Mr. Nodae MICHABL LAWRENCE HAVENS Direct Examination by Ur. Dodge Cross-Sxamination by fir. Sullivan Redirect Examination by Mr. Dodge Redirect Bxamination Continued by Mr. Dodge Recross Examination by Mr. Sullivan CHARLES WEST Direct Examination by Mr. Dodge CHARLENE POWELL Direct Examination by Mr. Sullivan Cross-fxamination by Mr. Dodge TERRY POWELL Direct Sxamination by He. Sullivan Cross-gxamination by Hr. Dodge Redirect Bxamination by ur. Sullivan DAVID MINZEY Direct Examination by Mr. Sullivan Voir Dire Examination by tir, Dodae Girect Examination Continued Crose-fxamination dy fir. Dedde Redirect Sxamination by ite. Sullivan Recross @xamination by tir. Dodge © NOBEL, IT Bxamination by ir. sullivan Cross-Examination dy Mr. Dodge EXHIBIT: MARKED: Joint Exhibit 213 23628 2320 MAR 0 7 i997 2355 2360 2363 RECRIVED: 2359THE COURT: Members of the jury, we again apologize for the delay in getting started, The attorneys and 1 had to meet this morning te discuss timing sequencing issues. We're ready to go with the next witness. fr. Dodge. YR, NOGE: Thank you very much, your Honor. Ig t couid call Rhonda Havens as a witness, piesse- RHONDA RAVENS called at about 9:48 a by the Defense, sworn by the Clerk, testified: DIRS? BY MR, DODGE: » 23 2 24 Good morning. Good morning, Would you tell us your name, please? Rhonda Havens. where do you live? 20th Avenue in Remus. And where do you work? The Sank of Lakeview there in Remus, Now, ceferring to Sxhibit B, which i asked you to took at earlier this morning, is the Bank of Lakeview on Exhibit B? Yes. [k's down in this area of the downtown. 2324sn re 21 2 You're pointing to the southwest corner of Exhibit 8: Now, is there another hank in downtown Lakeview -- T'm sorry -~ downtown Remus? Yes. What is the other bank? Old Kent. And is that -- where is that relative to the Bank of Lakeview? s Kitty-corner across the street. Beth banks are pretty well marked? ¥: Now, if T could ask you some questions about July of 1995; in particular, the time frame around July 4th, 1995, Were you home in the Remus area durin 4th, 5th, Sth time period? Yes. Were you working at the Bank of Lakeview? Yes. Now, can you tell us whether there was some work being done at the dank, or something in that time frame, around duly 5? We were having carpet laid in the bank on July 5th, the week of July 4th through the weekend. 2322238 Now, in that time frame, did you have occasion yourself to go to the Bank of Lakeview after hours, so to speak? Yes. T had to go down and let the carpet layers out late one night. what time was that? To my best recollection, it was July Sth. And we have a calendar here, a blowup of a calendar, which would indicate that that would be -- July 5th would have been a Wednesday? Yes. Is that consistent with your recollection? Yes. was it a workday? Yes, it was. So, after work, you went home, and then you want back to the bank? Yes. Now, what time was it that you went back to the bank? tt was approximately 10:15 when I left my house to 90 back down and let them out. And there was sone problens. They wanted to work all night. So T had spent some tine down there. And, by the time we did leave, it was between 10:39 and 10:45. Ckay. Now, you say by the time that we ieft. who else was there? 2323yp 1 A Pho carpet layers. 2 @ Now, did you also check the ATM machine at that tii 3 A No, E did not, a Q Did you do anything where you would have had a time entry 5 at the bank, as far as either -- anything at the ATM 6 machine, or punch in or punch out for that evening visit, 7 of anything where you could -~ there would be a bank 8 record of the time that you were there on July 5th? 8 A Setting of the alarms. 16 Now, is there some type of video or other surveiilance aw system within the bank, that there was a time frame that 12 we could have cetrieved exactly when it was that you were 13 there? a4 A Yes, there are videos, but they have been taped over by now, 18 Q 80 that to be discussing this nov, in October of 1996, a would not allow us to go back to retrieve the videos that 18 would have been indicating the time and ali of those 9 things on Wednesday, July Sth, 1995? 20 Ao, aa Q Now, if you could point on gxhibit @ to the area where 22 you live, please, your home area. 23 A Approximately, right down -- just south of this area 24 Q Now, would that be the intersection of 4-20 and 20th 23 Avenue? 2324Yes. And how far south of that intersection do you live? Maybe a quarter of a mile. Mow, can you tell the jury, if you -- or what happened, when you returned from the bank, and the carvet layers and all of those things that you've just testified about; what happened when you returned to your home that evening? We were getting ready to set off fireworks at our house. And, when T pulled in the driveway, when I got out, I heard some gunshots. And my husband said, "Go in the house and see if anybody reports them,” because there was quite a few shots. And I went in, and there was never anything reported over the scanner, and we proceeded with our evening. Now, when you say we ware there, who 211 was there? vy husband, my two kids, my sister-in-law and brother-in-law. And what are their names, your sister-in-law and brother-in-Law? Shery Tallman and Mike Tallman. Now, how many shots did you hear? I heard approximately three. And from what direction from your residence were the shots? 2325= Q a They were to the west, northwest, of our house. Northwest of your home? Yes. Could you point to Exhibit B and, just for directional purposes, point the northwest direction from your hone on Exhibit 8? Tk would be over -~ somewhere over in here Now, can you tell us, as far as the number of shots that you heard, how they were broken up tine wise, whether they were back to back to back, or there was a time difference between the first and the second and the second and the third and, if so, how mach? T—- when I got out, it was just like boom, boom, boom, Now, fcom what your husband had said to you, did you get the impression that there had been sone earlier shots or not? Yes. Now, what made you conclude that? Because he said there had been quite a few. 1 said, "what" -- you Know, "What's going on?” He said, "Go on in and see if anybody reports anything. There was quite a few shots.” Now, you want in and listened to the police scanner? Yes. For how long? 232623 A Probably 20 minutes. @ Did you hear anything on the police scanner about the shots? A No. MR, DODGE: Thank you, ma'am, No further questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Cross~examination, MR. SULLIVAN: T have no questions, Judge. THE COURT: Any questions from the jury? Seeing none, may the witness be excused? WR. DODGE: I would ask that she be excused, your Honor. MR. SULLIVAN: Ho objection. THE COURT: You may step down and are excused. Next witness, please, AR. DODGE: Michael Havens, your Honor. THE COURT: Sir, if you would come forward and stand before the Clerk to be placed under oath. MICHAEL LAWRENCE HAVENS called at about 9:55 A.M. by the Defense, sworn by the Clerk, testified: DIRECT EXAMINATION BY “IR. DODEE: 9 Would you please state your name for us? A Michael Lawrence Havens. 2327ye = a And you are the husband of Rhonda Savens? Correct. You and your wife reside south of the intersection of M20 and 20th Avenue east of Remus, Michigan? Yes. You were residing there in July of 19957 Yes. Now, if 1 could ask you, sir, whether there was 2 time, in the 4th of July time period, where you heard something that has resulted in you being subpoenaed here as & witness? If you can just tall us about that -~ those events. We heard some gunshots. And, after we heard that there was -- that the Tower brothers were missing, we told a few peogle that we had heard some gunshots around the time that -- after they had disappeared. Now, who is "we"? My wife, my sister, and my brother-in-law was there, but he's kind of hard of hearing. That would be Mr. Tallman? Yeah. And your sister's name is Mrs. Tallman? ves. Now, can you tell us what time of the day it was that you heard what you heard?1 18 1 20 21 "> 2 Tt was between 10:00 and 11:00 P.M. And do you know, date wise, when that would have been? T cannot say exactly what day it was, 1 think it was the Sth, but I'm not a hundred percent positive. Now; how many -- or let me ask you this: Do you know the fference between firework sounds and gunshot sounds? t would say, yes. Wow, how many -~ and you would put those sounds in the category of what, the sounds that you heard that evening? Gunshots. Now, how many did you hear? Between six and twelve. can you tell us how they wece spaced out —- Not exactly, no. ~~ as far as whether some were closer together than others, or whether they all seemed to be about the same? They weren't all the same repetition, Sut T -- you know, it was over a year ago. T understand. Sut were like some ~- like half of them closer together than the other half, or was it like two of them were closer together than the other ten, or = I don't remember. How, you, at that time, thought that the shots were coming from the Rems city area? Correct. 2329a Wow, how far is the Remus city -- or the intersection of M-66 and M-20, how far.is that from your home? About a mile. So your thinking back then was that the shots were as far as 2 mile away? Now, do you know how far it is, as the crow flies, from your home and the Tower farm? I've never measured it. Can you approximate for us? Probably three quarters of a mile maybe. Mould that be within the distance of the sounds chat you It's possible. MR. DODGE: hank you, sir. No further questions, your Ronor. ‘TRE COURT: Cross~examination. ‘CROSS~EXANINATION MR. SULLIVAN: Good morning. Ri. You heard between six and twelve shots? Yeah, I believe it. And you think a gun versus a Firework? Yes. 23302 A o Dp BR and would you —- do you hunt yourself? Yes. Do vou have any idea of -- how loud was it, lowd or not loud? I don't know, Tt was loud enough to hear it. Okay. But was it faint, you know, just real quiet or - It was noticeable. In the middle somewhere? 1 know it's hard to talk about this, but -~ Right. You know, I don’t know what you call faint. You know, gunshots are gunshots. If you're standing right by them, they're loud. If you're a long ways away, they're guiet. Where did these fall into? You could hear them. They weren't right beside ne, and they weren't way, way ofZ? Noe And you think this was on the night of the Sth? I think it was. Mere you around the house tt e day? That evening, yes. From what time on, do you recall? Oh, in and out from -- 1 don't know. I probably cot out of work 5:00 or 6:00, somewhere in there. De you -- let's ses, That would have been in July. Do 2331~ is you think the windows to your house would have been open and such? Té ik was hot, they would have been closed. Tf it was 70, they would have probably been open. Did you hear any gunshots that day between the hours of 5209 to 7:00 P.M.? Not that I recall. Okay. Let me expand that and say -- and ask you -- let's say that you didn't hear these gunshots on the 5¢! but -- the six to twelve that you mentioned ~~ but heard them some other day of the week. Did you hear qunshots on any other day than the day that you heard the six to twelve shots? I live in the country, and we hear gunshots a lot. So maybe you did, maybe you didn't? T Know T heard them on the 5th, And they were unusual, what T heard, 1 shouldn't say the 5th. But the gunshots T heard were unusual. TI told ay wife to run inside ana listen to the searmer because T just heard gunshots coming from, it sounded like from town. But T hear gunshots all the tims. and I heard some this week, you know. That's just the nature of your area? Yeah. Thank you, sir. 23321! we » a = 0 2 a ay Q One other. When you talked to people about this, after learning that the Towers had disappeared, do you remember who it was that you talked to? i talked to Larry Richards, was probably the main person T talked to. Did you talk to people around the a A few, yes. Ali right. MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you. REDIRECT SZANTNATION MR. DODGE: Sic, when you hear gunshots on other occasions, do you always have your wife go and listen on the scanner? Ne. Mow, as far as what date this might have been, was your wife returning from somewhere right in this same time frame that you've testified to? Yes. re was she returning from? She was coming back from the bank. Aad do you know why she had gone to the bank? Yeah, to throw the carpet layers out. WR. DODGE: Thank you, sir. No further questions. 4 HE COURT: Recross? HR. SULLIVAN: Mo. 2333é 26 a THE COURT: Any questions from the jury? There does appear to be one. {At about 10:02 A.M. - conference at bench off record) THE COURT: For the record, counsel have examined the question. ar. Dodge will ask the question. REDIRECT EXAMINATION CON UBD In what respect were the gunshots ynusuai? They didn’t sound like a .22 or a deer rifle. That's what you usualiy hear, What @id it sound like? My experience, playing around with guns, it sounded like a handgun to me. Now, earlier on, I nad asked you, before you testified today, whether or not you could tell us what caliber might have been involved, this morning, when you and were talking. Yeah, Right. veal And what was ik you told me about the caliber issue? Tim not positive, you know, witheut seeing the gun, MR, DODGE: No further questions, your Honor. TRE COURT: Recross? 23344 e a S RECROSS EXAMINATION SULLIVAN Tr didn't sound like a .227 9 Tt -- t could say it wasn't a .22, and it probably wasn't a 30.96. Another unusual thing about the shots, is the direction they came from, which sounded like town. Usually, if you hear shots, they're coming from the corn fisid uo the road or wherever, not town. MR. SULLIVAN: No additional, Judge. Redirect? Nothing additional, your Honor. Any further questions from the jury? Seeing none, may the witness be excused? MR. DODGE: Yes, sir. MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. TRE COURT: You are excused, sir. would counsel approach? {At about 10:05 A.M. - conference at bench off record) ‘THE cour’ Members of the jury, the attorneys and T need to do some scheduling discussions, and so we'll be taking 4 recess at this point. 1 will ask you to go to the jury room, Court is recessed. (At about 10:07 A.M. - recess? 2335wi 1S a uy 18 1 (At about 12:07 P.M. - jury not oresent) QOURT: I note for the record the jury is not now in the courtroom. Counsel have brought to the Court's attention an issue -- we seem to be missing 2 prosecutor. WR. NOBEL: I thought he went like to get his coat thing, your Honor. He went out the back door. 42, DODGE: Your Honor, could we approach the bench for just one moment? TSE COURT: You may. (At about 12:08 P.M. - conference at bench off record) THE COURT: Starting over, I'l! note for the record that the jury is not now in the courtroom, Counsel ar present, as well as the defendant, There has been an isaue raised regarding the State's ability to call a witness, in terms of objections regarding the timeliness the disclosure. Mr, Sullivan, 7 would ask that you begin by stating what it is you're requesting, Mr, Dodge may then make his response, MR, SULLIVAN: The witness that T would request bs allowed to testify, his name is Lieutenant ~~ his name is Dave mzey. He's a Detective Lieutenant with the Michigan State Police, assigned to the Major Crimes Unit, 2336ss 4 o ims 3 and has been employed in that capacity for sevan and-a-half years, and has testified as an expert in cases such as this on several occasions, and has analyzed crime scene evidence, roughly, approximately 200 homicide crimes scenes a year, and 5 to $00 major crimes, including other tyses of violent offenses during the course of that year -- or a given year. And he would testify, in the form of rebuttal evidence, to evidence elicited ‘ough witnesses by the defense, both State witnesses and defense witnesses. Taat would be the individual who t would propase testify, Judge. THE COURT: Mr. Dodge. HR. DODGE: Your Honor, T would object based upon timeliness considerations. The first that T was advised goncarning this potential witnese was within the last working day of so, and have not had an opportunity to properly investigate the background of what the witness would be testifying to noc to have it independently evaluated by a defense expert. So that I am askine preliminarily, as a threshold issue, that the Court consider a defense objection based purely on timeliness considerations, ZX believe that not only would it be unfair to my client, with the case pending now for 15 aontr interject an expert witness in rebuttal that perhaps 233724 25 could have been noticed out prior to trial as a witness in chief, that could have then led to independent review and analysis and a presentation by the defense concerning the same issues, {1 would ask that the Court not aliow it. And if the Couct were to allow it, your Honor, unfortunately, T would have to request a further delay in order to have the witness's opinions independently evaluated in the case, so that we may be prolonging the trial for another several weeks in order to have a ngful consideration of a response to the witness's So I would ask that the witness not be allowed to testify in rebuttal. HE COURT: Mr. Sullivan, MR. SULLIVAN: First, I would like to comment on the law, as T know it, regaiding a prosecutor's obligation to notice rebuttal witnesses to the defense. MCL 767.40 A sets forth the State's duty with regard to notifying the defense of witnesses the state intends to call at trial. First of all, the prosecutor shall vrovide the defense, upon the filing of the Information, with a list of all res gestae witnesses known to the prosecuting attorney. Second, that duty or cesponsibility is continuing in nature, and the 233812 13 14 29 20 21 prosecutor has a continuing duty to make disclosures of rea gestae witnesses as they become known. There is no mention within 767.40 4 that a prosecutor has a duty to provide notice to the defense of its rebuttal witnesses before time for rebuttal. On the other hand, there are two statutes in sicl igan which impose upon the prosecuting attorney, @ duty to provide notice of rebuttal witnesses. And those are in the area of insanity end alibi, Alibi -- the alibi statute is referenced in NCL 768.20. And, again, it sets out an affirmative duty to provide the defendant with notice of alibi witnesses that would be offered in rebuttal. Second, MCL 768.28 provides a similar duty in the area of defense to insanity claims. These are the only two statutes in Michigan which impose an affirmative duty upon the State to provide advance notice to the defense of rebuttal witnesses. And T think there's an obvious reason for that, Sudge. Insanity and alibi are the only two areas, defense areas, where the defendant is required to provide notice of those defenses in advance of trial. Beyond those areas, the defense is under no obligation to announce its defenses to the government prior to trial or even during the State's case. The State really doesn’t have any ability to know the defense until the defense 2339yp bs 5 a oe ee 6 @ 3S 8 & 2 3 y RQ begins, The defense always has the ability te change tactics, strategies, defenses, up until the time that they begin their case with regard to this case, fir. Dodge and T had a conversation on the Tuesday before this trial began. we spent several hours together, trying to de emine which witnesses we will need and which ones we will not need, We came up with a series of stipulated agreements, et cetera. And it was during that conversation that Dodge announced to me his four areas of defense. ‘The next day, T listened to the defense’s evening statement, and heard it out on record. And, ducing the course of the opening statement, the defense indicated that it is their position that these killings were, quote, unquote, execution style, that they were brutal k: ings; and that given the nature of the wounds inflicted upon the deceased -- and he focused Particularly on two shots received by Ron Tower =~ that these types of injuries would not have been caused by 2 man who had the relationship that Kevin Tower had with his uncies. And the companion argument to this area was, that came out and was elicited through the course of the efense cross trial, examination of State witnesses and defense witnesses, that it could be street people that Revin Tower introduced into this family that could have 2340done these killings. And the argument goes that these street people kill in a fashion more like the -- more consistent with the injuries found on the deceased. So this is when T learned -- this is when the defense became solidified to me. And, as I hear this and as T hear the testimony, I begin to think, now, what kind of rebuttal evidence am T going to put in? And that sent me on a quest to see if there's expertise in the area that has been summarized to your Honor in our in-chambers Conference, And it is through Lieutenant Dave inzey that I have found this type of information, which f believe would suitably rebut the evidence presented by the defendant during the course of this trial, Where a defendant has no obligation to announce its defense to the State, and where the defendant can change his defense at any time, and where T was notified of the various prongs of defense on Tuesday, the day before the trial; I certainly believe that my efforts in this regacd are timely. And, these reasons, Judge, 1 would ask that you exercise your discretion and allow us to have this witness testify on rebuttal. You cannot rebut evidence until that evidence is presented. And, secondly, Judge, if the defense feeis that there's prejudice, then your Honor could provide the defense an opportunity to additionally cuestion this 23422 witness, could provide the defense with an opportunity to engage the services of its own exvert witness. And, on that point, if I may, the defense had announced to me, I would think it would be fair to say, within 2 week prior to trial, that it may call a witness named Tim Dimoff. And I was provided with his curriculum vitae within a few days of trial ~~ correct me if I'r wrong ~~ and asked on several occasions if I could see his revort. And the response was that, well, I'm not sure if he’s going to testify, I may be able to elicit this type of information from your witnesses, from Maureen O*8ri . from the prostitutes who testified, et cetera, {T didn't know of this Tim Dimoff and his tyoe of testimony and the street people defense until just prior to trial. And, for these reasons, Judge, I would ask that you exercise your discretion and permit Lieutenant Minzey to testify, and give the defense an ability to offer rebuttal-type evidence, or further question this witness, or do whatever it takes te avoid any prejudice. Sure, we're -~ we're in the middle of a very long trial, but this is an important trial, and we're searching for the ruth. and we showldn't short circuit that just because ik would be nice to get this trial over with today or tomorrow. 2342o Thank you, your Honor. NR. DODGE: Yor Honor, if T could just add one area of response? THE COURT: Yes. MR. DODGE: Your Honor, the defense is alibi. The prosecutor was given a written notice of defense. In the notice, it stated specificali: if for any reason the prosecution thought that the notice was deficient or not in compliance with the relevant statute, to notify me. That written notification, in accord with the statute, was done. what the prosecution's referring to as other parts of the defense, the basic defense is one of alibi, and if was properly noticed out in writing, without any written response from the prosecution. THE COURT: Mr. Sullivan, you're entitied to the last word, if you wish it. WR. SULLIVAN: Does your Honor need to hear anymore from us? ‘THE COUR Do you have anything elise to say? MR. SULLIVAN: No. THE COURT: Bear with me while I reflect. Mr. Dodge, a question. We have been discussing this issue on the assumption that there's a duty to ng our chambers discussions. And, in his disclose, dur 2343ES a arguments today, the prosecutor questioned, outside of the res gestae alibi, insanity areas, whe! er there is such a duty. Do you have authority indicating such a duty? YR. DODGE: Your Honor, since there was 2 written notice of alibi, an alibi as a defense, 1 believe 281048 would have a notice requirement. However, the timeliness objections are -~ are more than just the alibi notice responses. They have to do with whether or not there would be an adequate opportunity to examine this witness, cross-examine this witness, absent pernaps some lengthy adjournment, as well as to prasent surrebuttal testimony from other experts if the Court were going to allow this as expert testimony. THE COURT: 1 understand your position. Thank you. In regard, first of all, to the State's obligation to disclose witnesses, the State has cited ¥ Ich, 767.40 A, which specifies the State's obligation to disclose a res cestae witness, and I don't believe there's any claim that this witness falls within that catessory. I have not deen pointed te any other statutory authority reguiring the State to disclose witnesses. The pre-trial order in this case, which T understand both sides have pretty well worked around rather than through, if it's the standard form, simply 23444 observes that the State's obligation to disclose witnesses is set by statute, and then establishes a deadline for the disclosure of defense witnesses and the exhibits of both parties. On the assumption that that's the language, this pre-trial order does not specifically require a disclosure of a non res gestae witness by the State, That, frankly, troubles me, given that the current move in the law, civil and criminal, is full ai ‘Losure. The issue that f have been discussing with counsel, off and on, I believe primarily in chambers -- I'm not sure i it's been discussed on the record -~ goes to issues generally of fair trial, case management and an opportunity to present opposing evidence, particularly when the witness that's sought to be offered is an expert witness, TE I understand correctiy, the State learned of the defence theory, up to then it being basically a general denial, during the defense opening statement. That was some four and~s~half weeks ago. Flesh was put en the bones, so to spesk, as the trial progressed and examination of witnesses occurred; the State's position being, until that additional substance was provided, that the need for a witness of this particular nature was not known, he State now wishes to offer a rebuttal witness 234515 16 7 18 addressing this particular area of the defense theory. The cecord should reflect that the Court and counsel have met with the proposed witness in chambers, basically to hear by way of offer of proof the nature of the testimony and the witness's credentials. 1 simply note that so the record is complete, That was at counsels' stipulation, if I recall correctly. Wy general approach to issues of notice and the concent of fair trial, is to require notil 8 and disclosure of al! witnesses who should reasonably be anticipated to testify. In reflecting on, again, the standard form pre-trial order -- I don't have it here, but I assume it’s 2 standard form order, with the approsriate blanks filled -~ that is not well articulated, and that may be -- need to be modified, In essence, T think it’s fair that both parties know the witnesses that they're going to be called on to respond, recognizing that in the situation of rebuttal witnesses, sometimes it's not possible to anticipate that in advance Based on wnat I've heard here, T'm satisfied that the State did not fully understand this area of the defense theery -- the defense was not required to disclose it, of course -= until trial had becun and indeed was orogressing. Having heard counsels’ comments, 2348ui oo q yw oe ad “ o 2a I am satisfied that the State has moved reasonably promptly in obtaining the testimony it believes necessary to respond to this area of the defense theory. T am, therefore, not concerned that any delay that micht be argued, is sufficient to preclude the calling of the witness. What does concern me, is the ripple effect of allowing the witness to testify. And then = do believe the defense should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond with testimony of a like nature in terms of credentials and the like, And, even if T were ta @iscount counsel's natural tendency to overstate the delay that would be involved in securing such testimony, it would appear that we're going to be looking at a time frame beyond the vale of this week, which is what we told the jurors the case would terminate during. So we have questions of jurors’ schedules, not to mention the Court's schedule. While T am inclined at this point to allow the witness to testify, T am coing to ask that Mr, Dodge make an effort to determine what witnesses may be available, if he can even do that today; not to have them testify today, but simply determine what pool of resources he might be able to draw from and what contacts might be made, to get a time frame into which we can get someone 2347_ 23 24 28 inte the case, at least up to the same speed that the prosecutor's witness is, realizing that he's been put in a aifficult situation of coming in somewhat late. WR. DODGE: Could we approach the bench for just a moment, your Honor -— ‘THE COURT: Please. MR, DODGE: <= in that regard? {At about 1 4 P.tl. - conference at bench off rscord) THE COURT: For the record, T have spoken with counsel. We're going to recess at this point. = will be confecring with counsel later this afternoon. On this point, counsel, T will meet you in chambers. NR, DODGE: Thank you. TRE COURT: Court is in recess. (at about 2 5 P.M, - recess) (At about 1:50 P.M. - jury present? 82 COURT: Members of the jury, we're ready to start up again, We apologize for the delay. As T explained when we started the trial, things go with fits and starts. f think we've had our fit and are ready to start again. No disrespect by bringing 2 drink to the bench. t'm coming down with something very unfriendly, so t'm 234825 trying to keep it at bay by keeping fluids going. We will proceed on with the proofs. Mr. Podge, you had the floor last. MR. DODGE: Thank you very much, your Honor, we'd call -- ask Charles Yest to be allowed to resume the stand. THE COURT: Re may. WR. DODGE: Thank you very much. ‘PHE couR' Mr. West, you remain under oath. You do not have to be resworn. CHARLES WES? recalled at about 1:51 P.M, by the defense, having been previously duly sworn, testified: DIRECT EXAMTNATION BY MR, DODGE: Good afternoon. Good afternoon, You're ‘aaries West. And you testified, I believe, last wee! Thursday or so? Thursday of day, yas. Yes, sir. Now, 1£ T could ask you to direct your attention to July 13th, 1995, 2 Thursday, according te our calendar here that everybody's been referring to, and an occasion that you had to go with Kevin Tower to the 2349w = 5 Ramus farm. And you have en exhibit next to you which was an approximation of the layout there, perhaps not a hundred vercent to scale, but it has some of the different buildings and surrounding area, Do you see that there? Yes, sir. and if you could testify about what you said during any time that you were there at the Remus farm on July 13th, 1995. I I could ask you somé questions about that, please. Okay. Can you, once again, teli us about what time you arrived at the farm on duly 13? We left my house about 12:00 or 11:30. ‘Ye would have got there just before noon, I would imagine. And who was there when you arrived? When we got there, there was a bunch of Posse members and horses and horse trailers. And they were parked along here, along the road by the garage. There were several cars parked over here on the edge of the lawn next to the grass field. Kevin and ft parked the truck about right there, right in front of several state vehicles. Then T got out of the truck, and Kevin got out af the truck, and we started walking up toward the Posse vehicles, whece the horse trailers were, Detective Raw 23500 came up to us and took Kevin te his car, and I walked up and hen through the yard. And my father-in-law, Lyall Tower, was sitting underneath this tree in 2 lam chair. Who else was right in that immediate area where you joined your father-in-law, Lyall Tower? Lyall was the only one under the tree. There were people up here by the house. And then there were people walking around and messing with the horses, and they were riding through the fields. There was psople all over the place. They were running just all over the place Now, what did you say to Lyall Tower when you first saw him there? Well, I would have walked up to him and, of course, said, "gi, pop," you know, “what's going on?" and then just smali talk from there. We would've -- Go ahead. We would've talked about why Kevin was up there, if he knew, and whether there was any news from the brothers yet. How long did you talk to Lyall Tower near the tree there? I sat there for about 20 minutes the first time. Then ny leg was starting to bother me, sc T got up, and T stretched, I walked around a bit. I would've cone back down this way, and then walked down the road. I walked -- I remember walking past the car where Kevin and 2391Detective Rau were sitting, talking. And then I walked back up and sat back down with dad, How long do you think you walked around? Just five minutes. And that was in part because of the pain that you were having with your leg? ves Prom what you described back when you testi about this buen? Yes. Now, when you rejoined your father-in-law under or near that tree, how long did you stay there with him? Probably another 15 minutes. What was discussed during that visit? We were just watching the horses and talking about the weather, basically. Tt wasn't -- there wasn’t any conversation about -- we dida't think anything was wrong at that coint. We thought the brothers were coming back. Now, how long ~~ or what did you do after you had that conver -= that second conversation with your father-in-law? T qot back up and went to see if fevin and Detective Rau were done, because t had to get going to work. And what happened next? Kevin got out of the car, And about Zive minutes later, 235222 23 24 a 2 we left. Now, during that time that you were at the farm on duly 13th, 1995; at any time, did you say to your father-in-law, Lyall Tower, or to anyone at the farm, to the effect that Kevin ought to just tell them where they are, o¢ anything at all to that effect? No, F didn't. Now, vould you say something like that to Lyall Tower, your father-in-law? Well, given the situation, and knowing my father-in-law hyall the way I do -- the way T did -- if 1 would've said something Like that, 1 woul@'ve been severely chastised verbally, for one. Then he would have talked to the -- my mother-in-law about it, and then my wife would've found ous about it, and then f really would've been in Dutch. So I would've never said anything like that at ail. Would you have said it like to someone else? I didn't speak to anyone else. At any time on that date, did you say anything to the affect that Xevin ought to just tell them where they are, ox where the bodies are, or anything along that -- that type of statement? No, I did not. MR. DODGE: Thank you, sic. 2353a No urther questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Crose-examination. MR. SULLIVAN: I have none, Judge. THE COURT: Any questions from the jury? Seeing none, sir, you may step down. Next witness. MR. DODGE: Your Honor, with that testimony, the defense rests. THE COURT: Members of the jury, with that statement, Mr. Dodge is indicating that the ¢ fense has completed the proofs that he intends to offer, at least at this time. As I mentioned earlier, when the defense rests, the State is given an opportunity to present what's called rebuttal evidence. Me. Sullivan. aR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, your Honor. I recall Charlene Powell, your Honor. CHARLENS POWELT recalled at about 1:58 P.M. by the People, sworn by the Clerk, testified: MR. SULLIVAN: She remains under oath, your Honor? ‘THE COURT: Yes. 1 was just checking my notes as to her witness number. On my list, it was number seven. Matam, you do remain under oath. 23842 24 25 BY MR, SULLTVA! o DIRECT EXAMINATION Mrs. Powell, I would like to direct your attention to July 13th of 1995, the day that the Michigan State Police and the Mecosta County Sheriff's Department were out at the Tower farmhouse. ves. Do you recail that date? Yes, T do. And were you there? Yes. And were other family members there? Yes. And did there come a point in time on that date when Kevin Tower came to the farmhouse? Yes. And did he come alone or with somebody? With someone. Do you know who he came with? His brother-in-law, Charles "est. All right. Now, during the time that they came up, as Ravin was being interviewed, where was Charles? By the tree right over here, around in there. By where the red truck was? Up above in front of the red truck. 23854 a and where were you? E was right around in this area, We had a bunch of chairs and stuff around there, We were all kind of -~ it was teally hot that day, and we were all kind of sitting under that tree. And, when Chuck came, he was just standing around the tree there. Were other people -- family members there? Yes, Lyall was there, I was there, my husband. And T can't remember who else was sitting outside at the time, And, during that time, did Charles west say something that you remember today? Yes. And can you the tell the jury what he said? He was standing there by the tree. And he made an awkward comment. Aad 1 had never seen him before that day. And 1 knew from different things that Lyall had talked about him, that he was a very military man. and when he came, T noticed that he had military clothes on, and so I was really noticing him. and he made a comment that -- he said, "Come on, Kevin, tell them where the bodies are so we can get out of here." And it really struck me, because Lyell was standing right there. And Lyall looked at him, and he said, “That was really uncalled for." and, at the time, T just thought, what 2 thing to say to someone whose brothers are missing and -- 235612 13 14 5 16 22 23 24 © MR. SULLIVAN: That's all I have. Thank you. TRE COURT: Cross-examination. CROSS-EXAMINATION MR. DODGE? ‘That would be an unusual comment to say to Lyall Tower, wouldn't it? Tt was very unusual, You had never met Charles West before? No, No, Tt was obviously 2 very distressing time for your whole family, wasn't it? Yes, it was. At that time, we didn't know where the boys were, And, with the search and everything on, we were all kind of up in the air. And, when he made that comment, T never even thought about them being buried or anything like that. TI just ~~ when he said that, it really startled me, And I looked right at Lyall. And Lyall just looked at him and said, "That's very uncalled for." was it your understanding that Lyall and Chuck ~~ well, Lyall apparently had told you that Chuck was someone who yall was familiar with and knew what he was like and things of that type, right? Lyall just said that he was a very military man. And he just said that -- he never out him down or anything Like 238712 13 14 a o > » that. we just said that he was very stric' Now, as gsr as -~ where was Kevin when this statement was allegedly made? where was Kevin at that time? A He was in an interview with Detective Rau in the car. Was Kevin there under the tree? I -- 1 don't know where the car was at the time, I -~T didn't pay that much attention. Because, at the time, none of us ever suspected Kevin or anything like that. But the point I'm teying to get to: Was Kevin there in the immediate area where he would have heard that comment? Kevin was in the car, but T don't know where the car was. Chuck had wanted to go to work, and he -~ the tine was going on and on and on, and be was going to be late, And he kept making the commence that he was going to be late, and he «= then he made that statement. So the statement would have been like, come on, Keviny Say something, when Kevin would not even have been within earshot? Rev was not anywhere where veople could hear him. So is it your testimony that Chuck West was not talking to Kevin? No, he was not. He was not talking to Lyall? No. He was making -- he was just making a comment or a 2358statement. He was just like, “Come on, Sevin, tell them where the bodies are so we can get out of here." And he would have been -~ are you saying that he was talking to himself? T don't know if he was -- he was just trying to make a statement to get out of there or whatever. It was like -- it wasn't directed at Lyall, it wasn't directed at me, it wasn't directed at Kevin. He just made the statement, and it was like -- but it was such an awkward statement. It would be an awkward statement. There's no question about that, is there? That's right. And it would be an upsetting statement. We understand that. There's no question about that. Tt wouldn't be a statement that he's making to Kevin Tower, because Kevin Tower is out of earshot, right? Yeah, de was in the -- in the interview with Detective Rau. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, does it? No. MR. DODGE: Thank you, ma‘am. No further questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Redirect? 2359¥ BR. SULLIVAN: No. 2 THE COURT: Any questions from the jury? seeing 2 none, ma'am, you may step down. 4 THE COURT: Next witness. 5 MR, SULLIVAN: I call Terry Powell to the stand. s THE COURT: Raise your right hand, sir, to be sworn. 7 TERRY POWELL 3 called at about 2:05 P.M. by the People, sworn by the 8 Clerk, testified: x0 DIRECT EXAMINATION iL BY MR. SULLIVAN: 12 @ Good afternoon. 13 A HL. 4é Q 4r. Powell, I would ask if you could get a little closer 15 to the microphone. And, if you're going to get closer ta 1s one or the other, it would be the one on this side, all uy right? 18 A Okay. 19 Q Could you tell the jurors your nate, please? 20 A Terry Powell. 23 Q And how do you spell your last name? 22 A Beowweesi-l. 3 Q And are you relation in the Tower amily? 24 A Yeah. uv wife is Ron and Paul's sister. 25 Q and her name is Charlene? 2360u A Yes, it ise 2 Q Cutting to the chase here: Going to July 13th, ‘95; on that date, did you have an occasion to be out at the 4 Tower farmhouse where Paul and Ron had lived? 5 A Yes, T was. 6 Q and who else was out there, if you remember? 7 A Most of the family members, 1 don't really know which -— So a all of them, but most of them were out there, % 9 Q Were police people out there? a) A Yes. There was a search going on. an Q Did you have an occasion during this time to be 12 sitting -- sitting outside the house there? = 33 A Yes, T did. 14 Q Do you recognize the diagram before you? a5 A Yes, I do. 26 5 bet we lock at that exhibit number. It's been @ while. 17 Bxhibit A. Can you point out to the jury where you were 18 seated? i9 A Tt wac in this tree here -- I mean, undecneath of it. 20 Q Big shade tree? 2h A ¥ean 22 Q And were others around right then, too, and -~ 23 A Yeah. There was ~~ tyall was out there, and Char was out —~ 24 the And it seemed like there was some veople walking 25 around the yaté there, but ~~ 236119 20 ai 22 Do you remember Kevin Tower coming up to the house? Yes, I do, Did he come alone or with somebody else? Wo, he come with somebody else. Do you know who he came with? chuck West. Had you known Chuck before that day? I'm sure T probably have maybe seen him at a family get together. But, no, I really don't know in Uh-huh. And, during the time that they came up there, d@ ~- was there 4 point where Kevin Tower spoke wi this man here, Detective Rau? Yes, there was. And, while he was speaking to him, was Chuck s around your area? Chuck was headed towards us, and Kevin went with Detective Rau. Do you recail 2 statement that Chuck made during this tine? Yes, T dow Okay, Go anead, To the best of your memory, tell the jurors what you recall fim saying. Weil, he made = statement that, to the best of my memory. that was, "Hurry up and tell them where they're at, Kevin, I got to be to work at 2:30.* 2362a UR, SULLIVAN: He additional questions. 2 THE COURT: Cross-examination. 2 CROSS- EXAMINATION 4 BY UR. DODGE: 3 Hurcy up and tell them where they are, Kevin, I have to 6 be to work at 2:30? 7 A dh-hub, 8 Q Was he -- was Chuck West talking to Revin as this was 9 said? 19 A Yeah, He was about halfway between Kevin and us. a 9 Now, is if your testimony, then, that Kevin was not in @ 12 car, talking to Detective Rau, when the statement was 13 made? 14 A 1 think he was just about ready to get into the car. as Q That -- so your testimony is that Kevin would have been 16 with Detective Rau, but not in a motor vehicle at that wy point? 13 Correct re Q And where was the motor vehicle where Revin and Detective 20 Rau were? a1 A I believe it was right in here. 22 Now, is it -= now, where would Kevin and Detective Rat 23 have been when this statement was allegedly made by Chuck test? 23 Tf thie is the yard, Revin parked down in here. And it 236312. wo Q was somewhere between the two. So Kevin and Detective Rau would have been on 25th Avenue, then? Yeah, I mean, they might have been closer to his car ever here, but -~ Somewhere between Kevin's vehicle that he arrived in and Detective Rau’s vehicle that was parked on 25th? Correct. Now, is it your testimony that Chuck West was with nis father-in-law, Lyall Tower, at that time? Nell, he was on his way toward him. Row far away? TE you can just point on the exhibit, please, it would be helpful to us. 1 think that Chuck was probably cight in here. i Tower? Now, if Chuck is -- is Chuck headed toward Lyall? Yeah. So Chuck West is walking toward Lyall Tower, and Revin ~~ oc Revin and Detective Rau are behind Chuck West at that point in time, if T have your testimony right? Yeah. Th t?'s pretty close, yeah. So Chuck's headed east as we're here in court today? Okay. Kevin and Detective Rau are somewhere to the west? 236413 Q a a Correct. Now ~- and it's your testimony that they were not in Detective Rau's car at the time this statement was made? don't believe they were But while Revin (sic) is looking this way toward his father-in-law, is that your testimony? Corcect. And who else? member who else was And me and my wife. And I don‘t vr: out there, but -- But other family members? Perhaps. {1 know there was just 2 lot of people up there that day. I don't know if they were family members or not. Now, how far is Chuck West ~~ as he's looking toward his fathec-in-law, looking toward the east, how fac is Chuck West from 25th? oh, it's not very far at all. Well, can you approximate from -- to make sure we got the ght tree, you're talking about the tree closest to the use? nt, this tree here, We're not talking about the tree on the roadway there? corract. Now, we have some photagraphs of that. But could we have 2368a5 a mm a Q ° » aA > a your approximation of how many feet Chuck West would have been from the middle of 25th Avenue at the tine that this statement was allecedly made? 25, 30 feet. And, while Chuck is looking toward his father-in-law, he says something, hurry up, Kevin? Mell, he was walking up there. I mean, he wasn't just poisted right at his father-in-law. But headed east? Yeah. Chuck's moving in an easterly direction, just like I'm walking right now? Well, actually, Chuck come across tike this. But Chuck's moving avay from 25th? Correct. Moving over toward this tree? Uh-huh. And Detective Rau and Kevin, according to your testimony, are somewhere between Revin's vehicle and Detective Rau‘s vehicle? fell, I believe they were right ~~ just about right at Detective Rau’s, 1 don’t think they were in it yet On 25th? on 25th. By the way, do you remember if Detective Rau's vehicle 2366¥ » was on the east or west side of 25th? A T believe it was on the west side. Q So that would make it even farther away then? A Bight or ten feat, yeah. Q fight or ten feet farther -~ A Yeah, A -> away than if it were on the east side? A Uh-huh. Q So that eight or ten feet, not to be confused with the 29 to 30 feet that Chuck West would have been away from Revin Tower at that point? A Okay. Q I'm sorry, Yes, away from Kevin Tower aA Yeah. 9 © acco! ng to your testimony? Okay. Q and, while Chuck is directed toward Lyall, he says something to the effect: Hurry up, Revin? A Yeah. Right. MR. DODGE: ‘Thank you, sir. No further questions, your donor. ‘THE COURT: ivect? REDIRSCT BXAMINATION BY MR, SULLIVAN: Q How did ~~ did Lyall hear it, or did he react in some 2387way? Yeah, Lyall heard it. We said, "That was uncalied for,” and he was kind of upset about it. SULLIVAN: That's all T have, Judge. THE COURT: Recross? BR, DODGE: No further questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Any questions from the jury? Seeing none, sit, you may step down, Next witness. (Joint Exhibit 213 marked! 4R. SULLIVAN: Your Honor, pursuant to an agreement previously reached, T have marked as Exhibit 213, a document prepared by our office. And the heading on the document reads as follows: Phone cails made from the Charles and Kim West residence, telephone number 616 794-3130, for the period of Januaty 26th, '95, through July 14, 195. And what we have done, is extracted telephone eails from their phone records which are relevant and Le to this ca: ‘PAE COURT: Dodge. That's correct, your Honor, They're consistent with the Court's prior rulings regarding admissibility, THE COURT: Subject to those rulings, do you 2368stipulate to the exhibit? MR. DODGE: Yes, sir. THE COURT: It is received. (Joint Sxhibit 213 received into evidence) MR, SULLIVAN: Thank you, your Honor. I cali Dave Minzey. DAVID MINZEY called at about 2:15 P.M. by the People, sworn by the Clerk, testified: DIRECT EXAHINATION BY HR. SULLIVAN? Q Good afternoon. Good afternoon. T£ you could, get close to the microphone on your left. And could you tell the jurors your name, spelling your last name? David Minzay, N-i-n-z-e-y. And can you tell the Court an@ the jury how you are employed? I'm a Detective Lieutenant with the Michigan State Police. And what is your current assignment or unit that you wor with? I'm the Commanding Officer of the Violent Crime Gnit and the Investigative Training Unit. 2369ithout me interrupting, could you educate the Court and the jury on your career development, which would include training, experience and so forth? fy role in the Michigan State Police is to serve as a consultant to other law enforcement agencies in Michigan in regards to violent crime investigations. and can you explain to the jury and the Judge, your qualifications which lend to this career position? Educationally, I have 2 Bachelor and a Master's Degree From stern Michigan University. I'm currently 2 doctoral student at Western Michigan University in the area of human development. T have 19 and-a-half years experience with the Michigan State Police. T have been in the Violent Crime unit for approximately seven and-a-half years. 1 have been in law enforcement for a little better than 22 years. ly training includes the area of violent crine westigation, and focuses primarily on crime scene ment and criminal behavior. can you explain to the Court and the jury what exactly it is that you do? what is crime scene assessment in connection with criminal behavior? wy job pr rily is to look at various violent crimes, and break them down into various succinct parts, so that 2370wo 20 ai 22 23 we may be able to look at cases that are unknown and make some comparisons and draw some inference as to what the offender or different various aspects might be. And what, within your educational background and police training background, would qualify you to make these types of assessments? I've been the, what’s referred to as, a criminal personality profiler for the State of Michigan now for approximately seven and-a-half years. I have received training at the national level from the FBI. I received a variety of training around the country in a variety of sciences: psychology, sociology, anthropology. Have you previously qualified as an expert in Michigan courts in this area? Yes, Tt have. And if T were to categorize your area of expertise, would that be behavioral analysis to violent crime? That's correct. MR. SULLIVAN: Pursuant to MRS 702, your Honor, T would ask this Court to so qualify this witness. THE COURT: So I'm clear, as to that last phrase used, behavioral analysis to violent crime? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. TRE COURT: ifr. Dodge. 2373wy 7 18 19 MR. DONGE: If 1 could ask a few questions, your Honor? THE COURT: You may. VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION BY MR. DODGE: Good afternoon. Hi. Is the area -- is this an area of certification? No, it is not. So you don't hold any certification in this behavioral analysis regacding violent crime? That's correct. Now, ig part of that what you -~ { believe you testified to personality profiler? That's correct. Is there any certification in the area of personality profiling? No, there's not. And I believe the prosecutor also indicated another area, of crime scene assessment? That's correct, ig that a certified area of expertise? No, it is not. So you don't actually hold any =~ any license or other credential in any of these areas? 237216 17 12 19 20 That's correct. But the basic areas that -- of crime scene assessment, personality profiling, and behavioral analysis regarding violent crime, are areas that you have worked in? That's correct. WR. DODGE: {= don't believe T have any further questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Any objection to the request? MR, DODG2: Well, they're not areas of certification or recognized expertise, apparently. so T would -- perhaps the witness could testify, and the jury can determine what, if any, significance to add to it. But T don't know if there's any basis to certify an area of zed areas of expertise where there aren't any recog: expertise. THE COURT: So I understand correctly, you're objecting to a 702 qualification? WR, DODGE: Yes, sir. PEE COURT: Response? UR, SULLIVAN: I don't think that 2 person has to -- to be recognized as an expert, a person doasn't have to work in a field where there is a licensing requirement. This gentleman has a Bachelor Degree, a Haster Regree, he's working on his doctorate. He's been the in this unit for seven and-a-half years, been Commande! 2373w in golice work for 22, State Police for 19 and-a-half. He's been trained at the PBI Academy, as well as other training places throughout the country. He's got a background in psychology, sociology, and those types of human behavior fields. What more can I say, Judge? THE COURT: Rebuttal on the objection? MR. DODGE: He still hasn't qualified in any particular area of expertise, your Honor. We would object to it, Perhaps he can testify as any other witness and give his back -- or his opinions and things of this type, but to not actually have the Court designate an area of expertise that apparently does not exist. THE COURT: If counsel will bear with me. Leoking at NRE 702, there appear to be two areas that are covered by the rule, The first area are recognized scientific and technical knowledge, The other area is other specialized knowledge. given the testimony T have heard, T will quality this witness as one who can give testimony in an area of specialized knowledge, rather than recognized scientific or technical knowledge, that he has acquired by way of his experience and training. To that extent, Twill gualify the witness. MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, your Honor. 2374DIRECT S¥ANINATION CONTINUED BY MR. SULLIVAN: 9 > Oo Dp 2 Can you the tell the jury the specific type of service that you previde on a daily basis to law enforcement agencies? I consult with a variety of law enforcement agencies in various aspects of the investigation of violent crime. That can include everything from an entire profile, to interview strategy or investigative strateoy, the assessment of various potential suspects. How many violent crime cases do you review or offer consultation on in any given year? Probably between 5 and 600. How many of the 5 or 600 are homicide cases? Approximately 200. Does your work cause you to travel throughout the State? Yas, it does. Does your work cause you te travel jout the united states? Yes, it dees. Dees the Federal Bureav of Investigation have a Behavioral Sciences Unit? Yes, they do. ts this a field which is recognized throughout the law enforcement community? 2375o Yes, it is. Were you requested to provide assistance in the case that is presently before the Court? Yes, I have. And have you had an opportunity to review certain evidence of this case, such that this brings you here today? Yes. Gan you define for the jury the nature of the request made to you, what you had an opportunity to look at as fav as evidence in this case? You know, what is your purpose in being here, and what statements can you offer to this jury to better assist them in their deliberations? The request wae made of me to assess the information as to the victimology, which involves the study of the victime in this particular case, and an assessment of the crime scene, or scenes, that are involved in this case. T think, rather than interrupt, if you could just take the bali and roll with it. when you get tired, we can take a break an@ continue. I've had an opportunity to look over some police reports. I've also had an opportunity to talk with the detectives on the case, Detective Rau and Captain Lenon. The information that T am interested in has to 2376» > a5 1s 17 38 cr do with the crime scenes, which would be where victims lived, and also where their bodies were found; and the information that is relevant or pertains to the victims thenselves in terms of their lifestyle, education, occupation. Based upon that, it's my assessment that, looking at the crime scene, the home where the two victims lived was a rural location in Mecosta County, an area that is not known for having a high homicide rate, The residence itself would appear to be kind of a working class, old family farm, the nature of which and the location of which would not raise it, in terms of its gisk factor, to these particular individuals, They have a histery of living en this location for some time Their activities were monitored by other people. They were checked on periodically by a varicty of people. There would seem to be some evidence that this particular crime at least began at this location. ‘There, according ta the report, was evidence of blood, evidence of hair, evidence that something might have occurred on us locations on this property. There is no indication in the reports that this was a burglary that went sideways. There's no indication that there was any drug -~ illegal drug activity that took place at this residence. 2377o In terms of the victims themselves, they're both described as in their mid to late 50s, one who probably would be classified as severely mentally paired, The other one also had a mental impairment, warently was able to dunction and maintain a job. According to the information provided, they would -- they lived in this home. There was no evidence that ei hex had been arrested. There was no information that either of them had ever engaged in any kind of violent, aggressive behavior, any type of fighting between them and anybody en the two of them, One individual was else, or betw. apparently very dependent on his brother. That would be, Ron would be more dependent on Paul, Paul had his checks directly deposited at 2 bank, ‘That information, as contained the remainder of the report, would indicate that the potential motive fo: this was monetary. They had a history of locking the place up when they left, That was different than what the investigators found. Theic lifestyle, in general, would be one that would be considered very low cisk. Looking at the scene where the bodies were found, this again would be a very low risk location for 2 homicide to have occurred. 2378iz au ~ oo 3 oF & The use of ac e, I have generally found to be indicative of somebody who is a lit le less sure of themselves physicaliy, probably not muscular or considered athletic. Usually it is more a weapon of control and one that's quite often used in terms of 2 stealthy attack as opposed to 2 face~to-face confrontation. e's been my experience that when a rifle is used and a knife is used, that generally you might be talking about more than one offender, However, n cases just like this, if you have one offender, it's been ay would probably be # little little more -- probably very similar the victims themselve! o fact that the bodies were moved is also an association between the victims and an offender, Generally, when it is a stranger situation, the bodies are merely left where they are killed. The reason for moving them, most often, is fear of identification, There seems to be an element of manipulation to the crime scene. 1 know that there was a note that was found that appeared out of character, and did not appear to have come from either of the victims. Tf that is ribute@ to the verson involved, then that again points 2379~ 5 7 ¢0 a strong degree of ma The probability of a homicide in an area such as this would seem to indicate that the lower the homicide rate, the more probable it is that there is some connection between the victim and the offender. where you have a higher homicide rate, in a more urban area such as Detroit, you may have a higher incidence of a stranger relationship. But the more rural you get, and the lover your homicide rate becomes, the more probable it is that that is somebody who is associated with the victim. In my assessment of this crime seen, there was not only an attempt to manipulate the crime scene, there seems to have been an attempt to manipulate sone other aspects of evidence. The clothing seems to have been removed for some reason, When I have seen that in the past, it usually reflects a concern about identification. I'm sorry. A concern about the identification of the deceased? A concern about identification: if the deceased are identified, then that might lead to the offender. The offender feels that he or she could be connected if that identification is made. In looking at the manner in which the two victims were found, to me that's indicative of somesody 2380who probably is connected to the victims. They are more laid out in a fashion than they would be dumped bodies are dumped or are tossed in a hurry, they tend to just kind of fall like a sack of old cloth would appear to have bean laid out. and, general T have found that to be true, there is an emotional connection between the offender and victims. There's no attempt to overkili or injure, or you don't see this residual effected on the victims. In similar homicides to this where you have more than one scene; you have a scene where the crines eccurred and a scene where the bodies are found; generally you'll find an offender who is connected to both of those scenes. Tt would appear that the person involved this has at least an elementary undecstanding of evidence, 1 don't think they have an understanding of DNA evidence, but they do understand evidence. Ie would appear that whomever is involved in thie, this would probably have besn the first time that they have been involved in a homicide. 1 don't think that they are a fighter. 1 don't think that they have a history of brawling. They tend to be more of a vassive-aggressive nature, where they will 4o things to you behind your back or in a more stealthy 2381o manner. T would assume that based upon the other cases that T have been involved in, that the person involved as the offender would likely have a history more associated with theft and more impulsive types of crimes, things that aren't very well planned out. In fact, this homicide itself, or these homicides, to me, seem to have a very elementary or rudimentary plan, i don't think they were thought out fully. There seems to be some evidence that, after the fact, there was some concern about what had happened, and there was a need to try to @istance, at least temporarily, the victims from their residence. I£ I could go back to just a couple of points. You mentioned that there vas an element of manipulation ¢o the erime scene, being the farmhouse, and you made reference to the note. Can you clarify to the jury, and really to me, what that note means in terms of your testimony? @ note reflects an attempt to divert attention. think it's very consistent with the remainder of this -- oz these homicides. There is 2 real elementary atcemt to at least momentarily divert the attention away fron this house and away from these victims. The note, if -- if it was thought out fully, 2382~ a ” oO would not have lasted very iong, 1 mean, if we were to believe that, then they would have been coming back at some point, But, temporarily, it allows the person responsible to kind of collect their thoughts an@ maybe think of what they need to do now. Generally, following a crime like this, and th 8 level of manipulation, I generally would expect that the offender would Likely leave the area, or really lie low for a while. ‘They tend to maybe go home, and you don't see them for a long time, They stay in the basement, or they stay in the home, and they just seem to disappear for a time. Do you have any knowledge as to an offender's ability to committed? function normaily after a crime like this i Yes. Can you explain to the jury? In emotional homicides, those that are -- involve rage, potentially involving a husband who's caught 2 wife in another situation, that emotion will be reflected throughout the relations! You'll see remorse, you'll see all kinds of what we call post-offense behavior. This case does not have that emotional attachment. You don't see an enraged violent struggle. There's no defensive wounds. controlled, and basically executed once they were under 23831 control. So you would not expect to see an emotional 2 response. I have found that people who are involved in at back and these types of homicides tend to come ri 3 don't -- don't appear as if anything is wrong. and I 6 think that many times, what's the difficult aspect of 7 these cases, is that we probably want them to have a remorse. And, when we don’t see that, we assume that 9 something is wrong. Sut in homicides such as this, T 10 would suspect that whoever is involved, would probably a not show a lot of emotion. 12 Q hat about with regard to the use of -- did you have an =. 13 opportunity to look at the autovsy reports? 14 A Yes, I did. is 9 neluding the profile diagrams that are included within 16 that vacket? av A Yes. 18 Q $0 you know where the relative locations were as far as 29 the stab wounds and so forth? 20 A Yes. 22 Q what do you make of this? 22 A The stab wounds to the one victim would appear to be 23 probably the strongest evidence of emotion that we have = 24 seen in this whole investigation. An assault to the : 25 chest like that usually means an emotional bond. And not 2384a 8 knowing what the connection between the two were, we may assume that there was a little more emotion shown with that victim than the other victim, The weapons, the fact that they were shot, however, really is a distancing, as T think this person's emotions would be. They're going to seem very distanced. They're not kind of up close and personal. They are away. There's no information in the autopsy report. that these were contact wounds. So we have to have at least 2 distance where we're not going to have the tattooing, where we’re not going to have the evidence that would come from burnt gunpowder, which I think distances us from them, as this offender would be distanced from the victims. And, when you use the term or phrase "emotional bond,” can you explain what you mean by that? There is an emotional connection, however slight. This is not a stranger situation, There is an eno’ nal connection at some point between your victims in this case and the offender. They have a history. They have had likely a relationship of some sort. MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you. No additional questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Cross-examination. 2385s o DoD: Thank you. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DODGE: a 2 A A Good af ernoon. This sounds like soft science. would that be 2 good description of everything you've just exoressed? yes. Wow, as far as crime scene assessment is concerned, was one crime scene that you're assessing a farm located on 25th Avenue near Remus, Michigan? tim afraid T don't understand your question. The crime scene assessment part of what you testified too Yes. -- was one of those scenes 25th Avenue in Remus, Michigan? Yes. How much time have you spent at that crime scene course of this assessment? f have not been to the scene, You haven't been to the scene, one of the scenes that you're assessing for us? That's correct. Has it been your experience that going to a scene can be helpful in providing background information? 2386~ 3 a ° a ves. Another crime scene that you're assessing for us is the location where the deceased bodies were found? That is correct. How much time have you spent at that crime scene? T have not been there. lave you ever been to Remus, Michigan? Now Have you ever testified before in Montcalm -- or Necosta county? No. How much data and other information have you examined concerning the community where the deceaseds lived? Part of my job in the Violent Crime Unit is to maintain data of all the violent crimes in the state of Michigan, So 1 will get, every year, a number of crimes compared to population. Now, as far as the number of homicide cases you might be investigating in a given year, you indicated about 200? ves. Now, how many cases have you been involved in where you became involved in the case after the trial started? one. One other case out of how many? No, this -- this case. 238718 19 20 21 op o> ow Oo th is the first case that you've become involved in consulting on after the trial began? That's correct. And at what point in the trial did you become involved in your assessment and consultation in thie carticular case? T could give you the time, I'm not sure where in the trial I would fit in. I have not been here. well, let me ask it this way: When did you first examine the autopsy reports in this case? bast night. sas that at Blodgett Hospital in Grand Ra No. Where was it? In my office in Lansing. And how would you receive those autopsy reports? They were fexed to my office. You're an employee of the Michigan State Police? That's correct. hn law Now, apparently, in your consuitation wi forcement agencies, one of the things that you do, is become involved like in interview tech particular case? That's correct. hat -- what involvement have you had in the interviewing techniques that were employed in this case? 233822 23 24 2 one. You also apparently are involved in assessment of various suspects -- That's correct. =- in your consultation? How many suspects have you evaluated in this case? None. You indicated something earlier on about personality profiling. Do you recall that reference? Yes. Let me ask you: In going through a personality profile, can it be helpful to have psychological test results? Now How about background of an individual? We may be on two different points here. If T'm going to ao a personality assessment for a particular case, I would ask the investigators not to give me any background ation on any potential suspects. well, let me ask you this: Have you testified before where you have had personality assessment information, not only provided to you, but you had it then in turn evaluated by a Ph.D psychologist? That's correct. what personality data have you had evaluated in this 2389case? None. Now, this area of victimology, so to speak -- I believe that was the label that you put on -- ves. ~~ a particular area of examination and assessment? You didn't know Ron and Paul Tower while they were alive, right? That's correct. How much time have you spent reviewing, for example, their medical records? T have no medical records. Now, one of your -- and, apvarently, eiso the lifestyle of the deceased can be important? That's correct. How many persons have you interviewed regarding the lifestyle of Ron or Paul Tower? Nobody. Now, I believe one area of opinion that you gave, is that there was no indication of drug activity going on at the crime scene location? That's correct. What information did you have to believe -- or that was even an issue, whether or not there was any drug activity going on at the location, the deceaseds’ home? 2390Drug activity, prostitution, illegal criminal activity are all indicators of a potential inflation of the risk value. and did you have some information that there had been @rug activity going on at the deceased’ home? Wo, T believe I testified that there was no information of drug activity. Now, ¥ believe that part of -~ in the area of victimology, part of what you looked at was whether or not there was any evidence of the victim being involved, or victims being involved, in Fighting or violence. Was that part of what you looked at? That's correct. Can that be important in terms of a person's hij ory for fighting and violence and things of that type? Te could be. - Now, part of your opinion is that if there is a killing, or killings, with a knife, or instrument of that variety, and a gun, that that would indicate more than one perpetrator or assailant? That's correct. Now, as far as whatever information you had review concerning where the deceaseds' persons were found, do you recall the date that they were found? 1 would have to check the report, but T believe it was 23912 a 2 ea the 26th of July. And do you recall whether there were any drag marks between the roadway and the acea where either deceased person was found? T don't recall reading that, no. Do you recall the distance of either deceased from the roadway? No. Siry if T could ask you to review Bxhibit C, which is identified as an exhibit in this case. Have you seen that exhibit before? Wo. By the way, have you sean Exhibit 8 before? No. Have you seen any of the exhibits in this case? No. Now the testimony was that one of the deceased's legs was over the top of the other deceased's leg, would that indicate to you that the -- that that deceased had been perhaps laid down, at least in part, on the other deceased person? Potentially. Would that be consistent with a dragging of a deceased, or with the deceased being picked up and carried? T's been my experience, when people have been picked up 239218. y 3 23 24 25 2 and carried, that they are laid on the ground in such a fashion that the arms would tend to be more underneath the body than extended. Nell, let me ask your If one were to drag either of these gentlemen, would they be like dragging them oy the hands or arms? They could be. Ti this exhibit is accurate, that the arms were found at the sides of each deceased; would that, coupled with the jack of any indication of drag prints, might that indicate that either or both of them was not dragged? Tt might, Has it been your experience that the more time you spend on a case, the better underpinnings you have for your opinions? That's correct. Gan you tell us -- for example, one of the cases that you apparently testified was in Calhoon County. How many hours did you spend investigating that case before you appeared on the witness stand in Calhoon County Circuit Court? I'm not sure of the hours, but T spent approzimately eight months preparing for that. Was that preoaration time important to you? ves. 2393wo 28 Q T£ the deceased versons were found, one with underwear on and the other with pants on, would the person with the underwear, might that indicate that the verson was perhaps in bed sleeping or something along that line? Tt could. Now, as far as you indicating whether the doors were open or locked, might it be important to you whether 2 residence usually had the doors opened or locked normally? Yes. So the significance of whether or not 2 door is opened or locked, might depend upon what the person would normally do? That's correct. Tf it were a residence that's normally left open, then it would be less significant that the doors were not locked? That's correct. As fac as this note that you testified to, would you have considered it to be an elemental investigative effort, as a consultant, that a note such as that would be examined for latent prints? I don't understand your question. The note that you testified sbout —— Yes. -- as far as the sionificance of the note: would you, as 23987 my 3 16 a 318 2 consultant, working with the Michigan State Police, routinely suggest that a note such as that be submitted for a latent print examination? Yes. Now, in your assessment, would it be part of your assessment in this case that the person who was the assailant, or one of the assailants, was unemployed? It would be my assessment that the type of employment that T would suspect of this person, would be vary menial labor, and they would not be a good employse, and the likelihood is that they vould not be working. So you're == you're trying to sort through what might this person be like who would cause this type of injury. You would be thinking the person is probably not a very good employes? Based on more than that. Based upon the entirety of the information. And that the person would either be unemployed or in a manual labor type of position perhaps? That's correct. was that part of what you -- Yes. -- were indicating? And that the person would not be dependable, for instance, in the employment setting? 239516 17 is That's correct. That's part of your assessment of whoever caused these deaths? Yes. A non-dependable, not responsible emplovee? Correct. A person who is impulsive, with a history of impulsive crimes? Probably a history of impulsive acts, Whether or not they have been caught, is another issue. Did you earlier use che term "impulsive crimes"? ves. Was it also part of your assessment that the person who caused these deaths was a controlled substance user? Potentially, yas. Well, T guess we're all potentially controlled substance users, right? Correct. But part -~ isn’t it true that vart of your profiling here, is that the person who caused these deaths is a controlled substance user? In eases similar to this, there's 2 nigh corre between controlled substance and alcohol use in these types of crimes. And desperation?‘a There's a motivation for the money, ves. Now, 25 far as controlled substance use goes and desperation, are those two topics interrelated? Not necessarily, can they be? They could be, Wow, in part of your profiling, have you been involved in cases where suspect was a crack cocaine abuser? Yes. And can you tell us, when you have 2 suspect who's a crack cocaine abuser, what do you find in your profiling? There tends to be a great deal of erratic behavior. Desperation? Occasionally. Weeding money? Lying? Yes. Stealing? Yes. Cheating? Involved in acts of violence? ves. Gun: 23971 FS a 23 28 25 a » Yes. Now, is part of your consideration that there may have been more than one person involved in this case? Yes. That is very likelv, isn't it? It's a possibility, yes. As you look at =- well, let's just see if we can break it out a little bit. Two different types of veapons, one gun, one knife, corcect? That's correct. Perhaps more than one knife, but at least one gun and one knife? ves And that would tell vou, as 2 profiler, that there probably are more than one person involved here? The rule of thumb generally is more than one veapon, more than one offender, Now, if you had to oreak it out wil =~ if you had, for instance -- for example, a male and a female perpetrator, and a gun and a knife, who would normally be the shooter and who would normally be the stabber? Tf you had a situation like that, generally the male would be the user of the firearm, although a long gua somewhat unique, and the female would be the user of the knife. 2398A So a iong sun would be less likely? A long gun is usually indicative of more control. If you're talking about the drug culture and guns, there's a high correlation between handguns and that behavior, The use of @ long gun tends te be somewhat unique. You don't see long guns used very often. Te kind of breaks your molds, as you see it? Tt, T think, further identifies it as something unique, Maybe not neatiy fitting into the generic categorizations? Well, in many regards, probably Eitting into some categorizations a little more neatly because it is anigue. Well, if you -~ if there were a male and female, you would normally expect the female would be the stabber and the male would be the shooter? Yes. Prom what you have looked at, faxed to you last night, in the autopsy and the deceaseds' autopsy diagrams, what can you tell us regarding the familiarity of the verpetrator, or perpetrators, with the human anatomy? That is probably getting 2 little more difficult to profile, only that we spend so much time on the television and movies oointing to head shots as a manner of death. Probably 19, 15 years ago, we would see many 23995 9 » os = a more shots to the chest, where nowadays we see a higher percentage of shots to the head. But what can you tell us, in terms of looking at the deceased, the diagrams that you recaived last night and the autopsy report; what can you tell us about the familiarity of the perpetrator, or perpetrators, with the human anatomy and the interworkings of the different parts of the body to inflict injury or to cause death? I would say that the person who did this has a very strong understanding, In my opinion, these two were executed. So you would call these executions? They were intentionally-placed shots in an area that almost certainly would result in 3 death. So there's na question here, in your mind, that these are execution-style slayings? I don’t see any information that would lead me to believe that these were intended to torture or to prolong; that, once a determination was made, they basically both had to die. But they would be executions? That is what you generally see with a rifle. Let me ask you: De you know i a medically trained persons for example, with the deceased person Ron Tower, nether a medically trained person would even have had to 2a002 resort to the use of a firearm, given the other trauma on Ron Tower's person? I'm not eure T understand your question. T£ you're asking could he have been killed aside from the gunshot wounds =~ Well, would a person familiar with the human anatomy, and a medicaily trained person, even have had to resort to a firearm, if the intent were to kill Ron Tower rather than to either having him expire from the then preexisting injuries, or to inflict some minimal additional injury with a knife or other similar instrument? Phat's a good point. I think that -- that the reason that they were shot, is a strong indicator of the personality involved in these homicides; that they did not have a lot of self-confidence to either physically overpoyer or use the knife in close proximity, that they chose a safer position, one of more control, with a rifle. And that a person with medical training and awareness of the human anatomy would have figured out that, given the degree of the cuttings on the person of Ron Tower, that there was no need to resort to a firearm? T seriously deubt that a person involved in that -~ there's a process known as your sympathetic nervous system, which is a very primordial instinctual defense 24012 mechanism of the body where the adrenaline is pumping, blood sugars are turned into energy, and the ability to reason in that situation is tremendously decreased. and, if you talk to people who have been involved in stressful traumatic incidents like that, they will tell you about how they seemed dream like, they seemed to have lost the ability to rationally think. We see police officers who are involved in shootings. We see a variety of people. So, to say if you had somebody who had a nedical background, that they could be able to ascertain; rose jously doubt it, given the series of events that would take place in a homicide, Well, you indicated, T believ: , along the way, that you don't think that these homicides were thought out? 1 don't think they were well thought out. What's -~ what's your expert opinion, in this specialized area that the Court's recognized, as to whether or not the perpetrator, or perpetrators, had with him or her, or them, a firearm when they went to the Tower residence before any injury at all was inflicted on Ron or Paul Tower? I don't see any information in the report that would suggest that this rifle was just lying there. so, in answer to your question, they likely did have a weapon with them prior to the beginning of this assault. 2402y Q 2 Ro you feel pretty sure about that? T can only go by what the information is. And there's no evidence that loaded rifles were routinely laying around the place. If -- if that is the case, then it would alter somewhat the personality profile When is the last time you have testified in court, less than 24 hours after you reviewed the police reports or the autoesy report? Generally, if T'm going to testify, T will be reviewing information right up until the time I testify. ce the But pethaps I should ask it, where you reviewed first time a police ceport or an autopsy report within 24 hours of your testimony. Have you ever done that? Not in regard to profiling a violent crime This is the first time you're ever in the position you're in eight now, with this minimal contact with the particulars in this case? This is unusual, yes. Do you think that you would know more than a fact finder that had been hearing about the case for four or five weeks, in terms of the background on the spscifics of the information? I might know more, given four or five weeks, than 1 do now. You might, or you would? 2403w Q T would say T probably would. Unless you were sleeping for the four or five weeks, right? That's correct. Was it part of your testimony that you would have expected the offender to have left the area, or lie low T think you said? Yes. Disappear for 2 period of time? Change in behavior somewhat. Not go to work the next day? Oh, they may. Ll, people may do anything. I'm trying to ask you whether or not that would be consistent, for a person to go to work the next day, would be consistent with lying low, disappearing for a while, the things that were your predictions regarding the perpetrator in this case. what I would suspect a person involved in this would do, would attempt to regain some control in their lige. If they generally go out every night, they won't do that. They will try to do those things that add structure to their lives. So they may go to work the next day and everyday. And, instead of being ten minutes late, they're a half hour early. So I'd suspect to see those types of behavioral changes in the person involved. 2404a 10 uw 12 x 83 8 ~ 3 » How do you sqaure what you just said with your earlier testimony that you would have expected the person to lie wy leave the area, disappear for a period of time? That's correct. I would suspect that the person who's involved in this case, or a similar case to this, would do things that would put some control back in their life. T£ there is a great deal of attention around this particular house, 1 would suspect that they would avoid some of that, I would suspect that if they do have a job, that they would go to work, 1 would suspect that instead of going out at night, they would probably stay at home. You wouldn't expect them to go out at night, then? Ho, I wouldn’t. Maybe after a while, they would. But T think that thers would be an attempt to regain sone control in their life. This -- this case involves the loss of control. and generally what you see following a crime like this, would be an attempt to regain some of that. So your prediction would be ~~ THE COURT: Mr. Dodge -~ I'm sorry to interrupt -- th: a bailif€ was signaling me 3 moment ago. 1 would ask to approach the bench, due to a communication from one of the jurors. There's been a request for a recess. We'll 2405» 14 15 16 W take our recess at this point. The jury may go to the jury room. Court is in recess. Counsel, in chambers, please. {Ak about 3:19 P.H, — recess) THE COURT: Mr. Dodge, you may continue. MR. DODGE: Thank you very much, your Honor. BY MR. DODGE: Good afternoon again. Hello. Sir, I believe before the break, I asked you, or perhans you had already testified, whether or not you would expect the perpetrator to go out the night of this incident. Z£ you're taiking about going out to socialize, I would suspect that they probably would not. Go out on the street, things of that -- into a non lesser known environment, so to speak? I would suspect that they would go to an environment where he -- or they would go into an environment they were more comfortable with. That they were more comfortable with? A piace that they had been before, as opposed to going te a city they have never been to. 1 would suspect that they would ~~ and perhaps T didn't explain that fully. 1 240620 2 22 don't believe that they would be involved in attentional- type activity. They wouid likely be involved in things that would help them bring their life back inte control. and, if that meant sleeping a little bit longer or staying home a little bit more or going to work, because work does offer a structured environment, T would suspect that. Now, would the person perhaps be like seeking a known harbor, something like that? Generally, Eoliowing & violent crime, particularly a homicide, the offenders do seek a safe haven. Safe haven? Yeah, whether that be a home, or where they're living, someplace that they feel secure. You, then, would not expect the person like to go out into -- are you familiar with Grand Rapids at all? Yes. Would you expact the person to be out on South 5 ision and 28th street? Only if that was a place that they felt comfortable. I would not suspect that that would be the first night that they would go out there. Now, you know of Dr. Stephan Cohle, 4 forensic pathologist? vas. 2407a 24 25 2 2 And do you value his opinions in the area of forensic pathology? ves, T do. Mow, is part of your srofiie that the perpetrator, or perpetrators, had a high school education at most? That's correct. Now, when I asked you earlier whether, in your opinion, the person would have brought a gun or not, you indicated that you thought that the person would? In my assessment of this case, I would have the conclusion that the weapon was one of choice. Now, ig, then, there were one verpetrator, and if you are correct in your opinion that the person brought a gun, why =~ why would there even be any need for 2 knife at all? Th use of a gun, particularly a long gun, generally is one of control. { can control a person from a farther distance than T can with a knii @ or ohysically with = hands. So the use of a long gun usually is a control mechanism to get the victim in a particular position. So that with that, then, to control a person from a distance, so to speak, or from a point with a long gun, would there even be a need to have a knife become invelved in that encounter? Tf we're talking about an individual; based upon the 24082 » information thak T have, the use of a knife would imply that wa have an emotional connection, that this person probably carries a knife probably as more of a protective device, at they're likely going to have that knife with them most of the time. f doubt that they're going to have the long gun with them ali the time, Se, in your opinion, the perpetrator would be a person that would be known to carry a knife, then? ves. Would you expect that this perpetrator, or perpetrators, had 2 military background? T would doubt it. { don't think that a person involved in this would do very well in the military. Years ago we used to give people the choice, either go in the milita: or goto jail. In that scenario, they may be pushed to the military, but I don't know that they would survive in a military environment. They’d have probably less than an honorable discharge. Do you thi RK that this might have been a person, then, who had tasted jail before? T think that this person understands what jail is about. T think that they have been caught before, which micht be the impetus in this case for not being caught acain. = don't <= So it would be your opinion, then, that the person who 2409fa o ° was involved in this slaying -- slayings of Ron and Paul Tower, had been in trouble with the criminal justice system before. You would expect that? ¥ would expect that probably not in the area of homicides. My guess would be probably in the area of theft. As though it were a person that had been caught committing a crime, suffered a consequence, like jail, prison, something like thats and then, in part, to avot re-suffering that experience, might act out this way? That's correct. Would you expect the perpetrator to be someone who would walk avay from an argument? Yes. Wow, do you think it was likely that an argument here erupted inte a fight? No. Your -- your thought would be that the person who killed Ron and Paul Tower, had a plan to kill them in order to > get an ATH cac { think that their plan was to get the money, and probably had gotten money there before, and that plan fell apart. But that it wasn't as though -- in your opinion, it wasn't ag though the person went to Ron or Paul Tower to 24102 get money, and then an argument developed, and one thing led to another, that == Let's just cali that plan A. go to get money from Ron or Paul Tower, unforeseen things develop, and instead of getting money, Ron and Paul Tower get shot, If that could be pian A, for purposes of the question, okay? Plan 3 would be, I'm going to kill Ron and/or Paul Tower so that I can get money. Now, is it your testimony that the person who's responsible for this crime, would have been more likely to have bee: doing plan B? No. Well, what would be your testimony in that regard? Based upon the evidence that I've looked at, my opinion would be that they went there knowing that these individuals had money, and they wanted some money, People who commit a homicide because they're angry with somebody, tend not to have the presence of mind afterward to be able to go to an ATH and through ail of that. Well, to get back to my question: Which is more likely, plan A, T am going to get money from Paul or Ron Tower, unexpectedly T get involved in a confrontation and an interaction that I don't expect, bué that just unfolds that way. Th 's plan A. Plan B, T am going to kill Ron ox Paul Tower so that 7 can get their money. Qut of those two plans, which one do you t 24iL‘ would be the most likely olan? Plan A, De you have your notes with you that you prepared? ves. could you refer to page 4, please? Going down five lines, if you could read that. unlikely that an argument erupted into 2 fight. And then if you could go ahead, please, and continue to read on, More likely scenario, offender coes to victims’ residence to get money. He is told he can't have it, or as much as tims, he wants. Offender develops plan to Kili the v get their ATM card, and drain the account. Offender develops a olan to kill the victims, get their ATM card, and drain the account, Is that a moce likely seenaric, as you saw it? t don't think it -- the question was asked in regard to the way I put this on paper. i don't think that the initial plan was to kill them. Something happened that we can't go back, We either have a threat, or we have drawn blood in sone fashion, That's when it was realized that the victims had to dia. Now, was part of the information you were provided, that there was an ATM card involved? 24122 g Yes. And that the account was drained? I don't know that. Sc, when you had that in your most likely scenario here, that was just something that you speculated about? You would have expected that to happen? Yes. Now, in terms of the Zinancial desperation or need that would have motivated a perpetrator to cause this type of trauma, would you expect that thece was a financial desperation? Probably not by the definition that you and I would look at a desperation. I think there might have been in the eyes of the offender. Would it be more likely that somathing like this misht happen where the offender is in desperate financial straits or not in desperate Financial straits? I think that the person who would be involved in this pretty much lives day-to-day. If we have a substance abuse problem, or if we have another problem, that's financial strait. Tt's not that they can’t make a house payment or that they owe money to the mob or something like that. ‘Their desperation would be that they're probably constantly needing money. 2413ye ws go 9 Q Like as a result of a substance abuse problen? a Very possibly, ves. Q Now, ig it part of your profiling here that the offender oes not understand DNA? a I wouldn't think so, no, fs part of your profiling that the offender is street wise? A Yes. Now, earlier in your direct examination, you indicate: some connection between the offender and the tocation. Some connection I be ve was the term: is that right? ‘That perhaps one or more of the offenders had been to this Remus farm in the past? ‘They were familiar with it, yes. % You would expect that -- A Yes. Q == here? Now, did you also have, as part of your opinion, that the offender would be @ person whe drinks in bars, with pool tables? A Generally. Q Usually @rinks at the bar? A Generally. Q Was it part of your profile that the person would engage 241416 17 B 19 a BY in intense interpersonal relationshins which end in a short time, usually violently? Yes. And that it wowid be a person who has one emotion, rage? Yes. Now, ate you using rage there in the terms that, is that ~- are you using it in a lay person sense, so that we can ali understand what you mean by rage, ox do you have some other specialized x aning of rage? No. Zt would be what we all might think of, in your orofiling here, that this is a person that has one emotion, rage? That's correct, And the person that has this one emotion, rage, is the offender in this profile? Yes. MR. DODGE: Thank you, sir. No further questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Redirect? MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, your Honor. REDIRECT EXAMINATION HR. SULLIVAN! You usually come into 2 case at the front end or the investigative end? That's correct. =17 a8 ig ° And you ave called upon to assist or consult to help nstrov the field of suspects? That's correct. A time management effort on the part of the investigators? Yes. And your ability to help them narrow the field, so to speak, is based on your knowledge of known crimes and known offenders? That's correct. And pattern or characteristic-type evidence? And, in fact, notwithstanding this is a soft science, in your own words? We're talking about crime scenes that have shown this, offenders that have been like this? That's correct. You indicated that you consult er work on 600 or sone cases, 5 to 600 2 year? That's correct. can we take it from that, that you don't spend eight months of preparation time for each one of those consultations? That's correct. 2416Q You would be tired today, wouldn't you? 2 A Yes, 3 Q And the time spent on this consultation, is it consistent 4 with -- is the information that you have been provided with from Detective Rau and Lenon and the reports, et Ey cetera, is that quantum of information consistent with 7 the quantum of information provided in these other 8 consultations? 9 A Yes. th reqard to the knowiedge that you obtained in order aL to bring these opinions today, that knowledge is consistent with the knowledge obtained in other 13 consuitations? 14 A Yes, 1s Q Would it be Zair to say that realiy the gut difference 16 here today versus the other many, many cases, is that not a7 only today are you talking te the detectives, but you 18 have a jury as an audience? is A That's correct. 20 Q ts it fair to say that you don't know who killed Ron and 22 Paul Tower? 22 A That's correct. 23 Q But you do know what type of characteristics are regular —~ 28 occurrences in these types of crimes? Yes. 24179 a A Drug killings; killings, a drug deal gone bad, or killings in that drug world, crack cocaine and so ‘thr do you see a pattern as to the type of weaponry used in connection with those types of murders? yes. And tell the jury what kind of weapon. Weapon of choice in those types of cases would be the handgun, particularly a semiautomatic handgun. Do you in any way associate a .22 caliber rifle with that drug killing type environment? Generally, no. We're not -~ we're not here -- we don't get Zrom you absolutes? That's correct. And that's true whether it goes -- whether your many, many, many -~ we wouldn't call them conclusions. ie would call them what? Consultations. That your many points of consultation are not, any of them, absolute? That's correct. ven the ones that may go our way? That's corre Have you seen instances where people that are related to people kill each other? 2418o 10 a 32 13 14 16 37 18 Q ves. With regard to being stabbed in the chest area or in the neck area or in the face area, do you see patterns associated with the offenders involved with that type of weapon? Yes. The offenders in those types of cases tend to be emotionally connected to the victim, Assaults to the chest usually is an emotional bond, An assault to the neck usually is an indication that we're angry at something that that verson might have said or not said. And assaults toe the face is a very personal connection? that when we are angry with somebody, that's what we picture, is their face. A lot of time was spent on the ifle and knife, you know, both of those weapons used in these killings. And T believe, your words, the rule of thumb, is more than one weapon, more than one offender? Yes. However, you testified that if it was one offender, then what? If it was one offender, then T would suspect that we have a male who is probably built very much like the victins here, not big, powerful and muscular; that the gun is used for control, and the knife really is the only emotional evidence that we see in this case. 2419A Going back to Dr. Cohle and his Findings in this case, realizing that you weren't here, But, with regard to victim Paul Tower, you saw his autopsy; is that correct? ves, The autopsy report? Report. Did you have enough time to look at that autopsy report? T spent about two hours last night on the autopsy report. Would you have needed to svend eight hours on that report, or was two hours sufficient? fwo hours was sufficient. All right, And would that report be the same last night as far as you know, that it was when the the autopsy was one back on July 30th? I believe so. So, even though you're looking at it last night as opposed to back in July, nothing has changed in the interim, Would you agree? That's correct. Now, with regard to Paul Tower and the stad wounds Located in that area, the testimony has indicated -~ assume this to be true. I need to provide a basis for my question. The testimony has indicated that there was a great deal of blood on the shirt of Paul Tower, and -~ indicating that this -- indicating possibly that Paul 242010 Tower had been stabbed while he ~~ when he was alive, because the heart was pumping this blood out and so forth. Now, if that were the case, stabbed first, do you -- is it more likely that you associate this crime with two offenders, or one offender? One. And how so? Generally, if you see more than one offender in that type o£ a scenario, we would suspect to see more evidence on the body, more evidence at the crime scene, of two people around the one victim. And we don't seem to see that in this case. But we're not talking absolutes one way or the other? That's correct. De family members kill family members? Yes. What is a person who is passive aggressive? Is that the term you used? Yes. That's an individual who really does not get anory with you right to your face. They do things behind your back. At work, if they don't like you, maybe they’!1 badmouth you or subvert your actions. They may damage your car, They tend net to confront people face-to-face. They do it in a more covert act behavior. 2421ys 5 ey 12 413 14 HR. SULLIVAN: T£ I could have a minute, Judge. PE COURT: Yes, BY UR, SULLIVAN: I£ this were -- you indicated that you did not think, or the evidence did not show, an indication of a robbery gone sideways? A That's correct, Do you think that if -- if the offenders would have been dzug dealer types, drug, crack addictive, user types, dasperate people, that they would pass up the opportunity to steal guns from a gun cabinet? A Probably not. MR. SULLIVAN: I have no additional questions, Judge. THE COURT: Recross? RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DODGE: Q@ dust 2 few more questions. As far as whether there were more than one offender, like one, two, three offenders; would it be significant, or could it be significant, if there are like three different sets of footprints in a suspect area? A Yes. 9 And would three different sets of footer 2422suspected crime area, be indicative of more than one person being involved? Or would it make it more likely that there's only one person involved? I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. If we're talking about right at the scene of the crime, we've got evidence to suggest that there was more than one person, then you're probably accurate. So three different sets of footprints would go toward there being more than one person involved? Tt generally indicates that there is more than one type of shoe impression there. Now, have you been involved in an investigation in the Grand Rapids area involving ten prostitutes? Have you been involved in the profiling of that case? T have not profiled that yet, no. But are you avare of the case -~ Yes. == ongoing right now? Probably next week. where ten prostitutes have been killed in the Grand Rapids area over the past year or so? Yes. That is a dangerous lifestyle, isn’t it? And with a high incidence of crack cocaine use? 2423A Yes. Ts that your experience? Yes. Now, when the prosecutor was asking you about someone bei: 9 Shot by crack cocaine people, the illustration -- or the reference was to a drug deal gone bad, Do you recall that? Yes. and there are those crack shootings where someone doesn’t pay up, or something doesn't go right on the drug relationship, so someone gets killed? That's correct. But have you also been involved in investigations where there's a taking of money from someone else who's not drug related? ves, To support crack addiction? Yes. And your testimony about the type of firearm that's involved genera’ -- ig that what you're saying? was that your testimony, generally crack dealers would have handguns instead of iong guns? That tends to be the weapon of choice. Wot to the exclusion of ail others, obviously? That's correct. 24240 23 24 25 And your reference to related peopie kill each other, perhaps the highest percentage being wife and husband, husband and wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, those types of relationships? I guess it depends upon what your victimolosy younger the victim, very young, obviously, zero to about five or six, the mother would be the most likely. As we get a little bit older, then that would change. But generally it starts fron that person and works their way out. So the highest incident of homicide, particularly in a person’s home, would likely be by somebody who was acquainted with that person, TE one offender was involved with the injuries and the trauma that wete present in this case, would you expect there te be a cut or injury on the offender? There's 2 likelihood that you would have an injurv, MR, DODGE: Thank you, sir. No further questions. THE COURT: Redirect? MR, SULLIVAN: tio. THE COURT: Any questions from the jury? it would appear there are none. May the witness be excused? MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, your Honor. MR. DODGE: Yas, sir. ‘THE COURT: You are excused, 2425yp ” 20 12 13 14 16 7 18 Would counsel approach? (At about 4:20 P.M. ~ conference at bench off record) THE COURT: Members of the jury, there's one proceeding I'm going to have to engage in, in your absence. 1 would ask that you go to the jury room. {At about 4:22 P.M, - jury not present) THE COURT: I note for the record that the jury has left the courtroom for the jury room. Counsel requested ft hat that be done during their bench conference. [t's my understanding that the State wishes to make an offer of proof, Me, Suliivan, MR, SULLIVAN: I call George Nobel to the stand, your Honor. THE COURT: Raise your right hand and be syorn. GEORGE NOBEL, IT t called at about 4:23 P.M, by the People, sworn by the DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. SULLIVAN: Q Good afternoon. A Good afternoon, Would you please state your name for the record? A Yes, xy name is Geerge Nobel the Second. 2428And how do you spell your last name? Neo-bee=1. NR. SULLIVAN: And if I could -~ permission to lead the witness to get to the point? HR. DODGE: Certainly. AR. SULLIVA! All right. BY MR, SULLIVAN: q And, for the record, you're a private -- 2 licensed private investigator, and have been hired by the defense to work on this case? Yes, sir. And you have worked on this case for approximately how many months? Since February, I'd say, of ‘96. Okay, Fairly steadily since February of '967 Yas, sir. Full-time? Well -- Part-time for part of the months and full-time for some? Yeah. t's not full-time. It would be vart-time. It wouldn't be like your investigators. low many -- how many hours -~ Oh, T would have to, you know, go back and research. At some point it would be minimal, and at others it would be, you know, maximum. 2427You actually don't know what elsa he does on his time, do you? Noe don't. So it might be about the same? could be, All right. How many hours do you think you've worked on this case? I mean, too many to count? You know, I could go back and try to get a number for you. But T have other duties as well. Just ball park it. Well, for the past five weeks, it's been full-time. Hundreds of hours? i, I'm saying that, you know, during the trial, my time up here at the trial has been pretty -- it's been a full-time commitment. Well, T mean in terms —- Prior to that, it’s been, you know, not fuli-time. But T have spent blocks of hours on the case during the investigation. The travel, the mere travel, when T live in Grang Rapids, for example, to come up to this area, involves a lot of tin yes, sir. wet me help you out -- or let me see if I can. Investigative efforts on your part in this case, investigative efforts, going out and pounding the bush, 24281 talking to witnesses, ali that kind ~- not sitting next to the defendant through the course of this trial -~ but, I mean, getting out there and digging, how many hours do you think? i7@ be =~ I guess it would be safe to say maybe hundreds. All right. Fair enough. Now we’ve gotten past that hurdie, and let's go on to this one. Let me ask you something, Mr. Nobel: Have you, in pounding the pavement and digging and digging and digging, found any evidence whatsoever that street people came up here and killed Ron and Paul? Have T found evidence thst street people came up here? Yes == No, sir. => and killed -- No, sir, not that I'm aware of. All right, Wow, if you were going to be cross-examined on this point or rehabilitated on this point, is that -- is that -- is it as simple as that, you have not found any evidence to indicate that street vecple killed Ron and Paul Tower, plain and simple? I'd have to say T have not found any evidence that street people killed Ron and Paul Towe: yes, sic. Without any qualification? Well, to my knowledge, as best as I sit here today under 2425rc 10 1 12 13 14 Q oath, I haven't found any evidence of street people killing Ron or Paul Towers no, sir. All right. Okay. MR. SULLIVAN: ‘That's all I have, dudge. THE COURT: Mr. Dedae. CROSS-EXANINATION BY MR. DODGE: Q 2 Have you been out looking for a particular person, to bring the person into court as a suspect, from the street? You mean, to -- to interpret your question, to do Ehe job of the police, in other words? ves. No, sir. T have not been trying to do that. Was part of your responsibility to go eut and find a street person who killed Ron or Paul Tower? No. Out of the number of hours that you have devoted to the case, was any part of your assignment, go out on Eola Street, or anywhere else, and ind the person, or persons, who killed Ron and Paul Tower? No. And let me ask you this: In the course of your investigation, have you actually tried to interview someone in that regard? 2430je On the street? Yes. Yes, sir. And what happens when you try to do that? Tk’s a difficult task. I'ma large man, as you well know, and that's intimidating by itself, But 1 have had 2 difficult time trying to interview and locate some witnesses that T wanted to talk to in this case. Have you had people walk away from you? Yes, Are these people who are ready to provide information about themselves and others? Not very readily: no, sir, And, varticuiarly, can you recali some particular individual who you tried to interview who refused to be interviewed? ves. All cight. WR. DODGE: If the prosecutor wants to call him, our Honor, T will just leave it right there for right Row, without any further questions. and it's the prosecutor's prerogative if he wants to cali 4r, Nobel as 2 witness on these issues. THR COURT: May I infer from that, you're thdrawing any objection to that, or do you wish a 2431ye 13 20 23 22 23 es a ruling? MR. DODe Your Honor, T was just trying to find gut what the witness was going to be asked. If this is the context of the questioning, I don't have any objection to Hr, Nobel being called as a witness on these types of issues, if the prosecutor wants to pursue this. THE COURT: Mr. Sullivan, any further questions of the witness? MR, SULLIVAN: No. TRE COURT: You may step down, sir. TNES! Thank you. WR. SULLIVAN: If I could nave a minute with the detectives, your Honor, and make a decision. "HE COURT: You may. (short pause) SR. SULLIVAN: No -= T apologize. We got to have a Little light moment, Judge. No riore rebuttal THE COURT: I assume from that statement you're not intending to cail Hr. Nobel? UR. SULLIVAN: No. THE COURT: Anything further, counsel, you would like to discuss of record before the jury is brought in and the State rests? MR. DODGE: Your Honor, with respect to a surrebuttal request —- 243220 au 22 THE COURT: Yes. HR, DODGE: -- I am not requesting any further delay to prepare and call an expert witness related to the State's expert rebuttal witness. However, the objections that were noted at that time, if the Court would allow me to still preserve those. But I'm not asking the Court to give me whatever amount of time might be involved in the process of actually prevace -- seeking, preparing and calling an expert witness. TRE COURT: I understand your position. T believe the record is preserved. MR, DODGE: Thank you very much, your Honor. THE COURT: Anything further? MR. DODGE: And, with that, your Honor, I have no sucrebuttal request. TRE COURT: Our intention apparently, then, is to have the jury be brought in, inform them the State is resting. I'll inform them that closes the proofs. ie'ii allow then to leave while we work on instructions, reconvening hopefully tomorrow morning at 9:00 A.M. with argument. MR. DODGE: Yes, sir. MR, SULLIVAN: THE COURT: You may. {At about 4:32 P.M. - conference at bench off 243319 He w n o record) THE COURT: 1 would ask that someone inform the bailiff to bring in the jury. we will get the proofs formally closed. tat about 4:34 P.M. = jury present) THE COURT: Mx. Sullivan. MR. SULLIVAN: No additional rebuttal, Judge, THE COURT: Very well. With that statement, members of the jury, the State is indicating that it has no further evidence to offer. With that, also, ft tell you that ali of the evidence in the case is now in, Whatever comes forward in the case from this point forward, it will not be evidence. What remains will be the attorneys’ closing arguments, the Court's instructions to you on the law, and thea your deliberations and decision. I have talked to the attorneys. We need to do some additional work on the instructions to get them into final form for you, So we are going to recess you for the day, while the attorneys and I work on those instructions, We will reconvene at 9:00 o'clock tomorrow morni; We are adjourned until then. See you back here at 9:00, Court is adjourned, 24347 38 13 Re Counsel, T will meet you in chambers. DODGE: Yes, (At about 4:37 PM, - adjournment) 2435ys 1 STATE OF #ICHIGAN) 2 COUNTY OF MECOSTA) wo Thomas G. Lyons, Shorthand Reporter, do : hereby certify that I reported in shorthand the r proceedings had in the above-entitled matter before z the Yonorable Lawrence C, Root, Circuit Judas; ; at Big Rapids, Michigan, on October 9, 1996. 1¢ i I further certify chat the foregoing and attached pages constitute a true and full report of 13 my Shorthand notes then and thera taken. 21 ies 23 THOMAS G. LYONS, CM, RPR, CSR 0287 » 3