Felton Dorsey

8/6/2019 Felton Dorsey

1/384

i*


2/384

. :

,

.!" !I

...

L.

DUPLICATE .TRANSCRIPT>

DUPLICATEA No. 10 K A 216'SUPREME COURTOFTHE STATE OFLOUISIANA

Volume N&LU D F X WFiled

API?ELLEEPlaintiff and

VERSUS

F E L T O N DEJUAN D O R S E YI

SUPREMECOURTOF LOUISIANAFiled

APPELLANT JAN 2 6 2010Defendant and

. .

UClerkAPPEAL FROMTheF' ST

Judicial District Court for theCADDOPariah of

HON . J O H N MOSELY , J R .- ~ d 5 1 , 4 0 6 # \\ Judgo

ML

BRADY 0 ' CALLAGHANJ . D H U THOMPSONASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS

CADDO PARISH CDUKFHOUSESTATE-APPELLEE

Counrel forSHREVEPORT LA 71101

CAPTTAT APPEAT,S PR0.TEC.T nEFENDANT-APPELLANT63 6 BARONNE STREET, FLOOR 3

Counrel for

NEW ORLEANS LA 70113-1004

lurnl.hd wlth h t h ' a TrurmrlptCOV~N

UHl H .I 4zz-u


3/384

1 06 - 1 063


4/384

i -. 7

d

! I-- .. .

c

cV-.J

3

rrrrCA-Jrr'2 -J


19/384


20/384

x'A

c c- c c

xx xxxc

GC3 9

I3

G2w0.cj\I rn

W

C

Lc)P,h

c.CL.r-

xxN '1 1\1IE1)(31406)


24/384


25/384

EV 1DENCE C N ' I Id [I ED( 2 514.06)


26/384

mn

id'dr

3-,,-

I -- A 1- - zri ) L-r j o- Icl'A-.2Z L04


27/384

EV IDENCE C'ON'U 1\1 LJ ED(35 1406)

- .- ..1

-. ,-_-


28/384

[email protected] I

\

I T

E

o h 'C T

cz4E


29/384


30/384

c - cQ 0:\ \P Ccc LJ\ \

13 1.3C 0G CVI Gi 0z

3

t!

,>z r;> orE H00


31/384

0 3 / 2G / 2 0 0'7


32/384


33/384

C A S E NUlvlEEK : 2 5 14 06 ( C O N T ' 0 )


34/384


35/384

CASE NUMBER: 2 5 I 4 0 ( (30N'I" D!


36/384

'7 l- 'C.'AS : 11LJMBE ? : L. .I I. 4 0 ; [ cc)\J1:' 13 )


37/384


38/384


39/384


40/384

( COlil'T" D


41/384


42/384

i I ...8 . ,;;*


43/384

. -.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 6 D [2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

IN T.HE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURTIN AND FOR PARISH OF C A D D O

SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

F E L T O N D E J U A N D O R S E Y :CASE NO.: 251406'

TRANSCRIPT OF THE PROCEEDINGS HAD

in the trial of the above-styled and numbered

c a u s e b e f o r e HIS HONOR JOHN D. MOSELY, JR. ,

Judge o f the First Judicial District Court, in

and for Caddo Parish, at Shreveport,

Louisiana, on the 14th day of May, 2 0 0 9 , A.D.

APPEARANCES:

M R . CHARLES R. SCOTTCaddo Parish District Attorney

M R . BRADY O'CALLAGHANM R . J. DHU THOMPSONAssistant District Attorneys

lr

M R . DAVID R. MCCLATCHEYM R . GLEN GARRETM S. MICHELLE A. ANDREPONTAssistant Indigent Defenders

Reported by:. V i c k i D. BeggsOfficial Court Reporter CSR


44/384

I N D E X- - - - -

i Examination b y the Defense. . . . 1 5 81 Defense challenges for cause. . - 1 6 3

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION:

i Examination b y the Defense. . . . 1 5 81 Defense challenges for cause. . - 1 6 3

Mark Na.tale

I

i

I

Ii

Cheryl D. Thornton

I

i

I

III

PAGE :

I

J o a n n S . Stewart

Irma L. Edwards

Ronald T. Olague

Danny Walker

Monica M. Hicks

Carlita R. DixonCharles Walters, Jr.

Sharon Snelling

Marvin Jefferson


45/384

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

a

9

1 0

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

. 2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION:

Nicholas Burks

D e l o r i s HarrisTheresa Williams

Randolph Dozier

R e a t h e r BarnesTeresa Yeates

K r i s S t . PierreAngela Johnson

Cynthia Andrews

Thomas Dewett

Jeffrey Smith

Cheryl Mouser

Lashunda Knowles

Eddie Dennis

R i c o JonesCarl Staples

Malcolm Brown

Examination by the State. . . . . 2 7 6Examination b y the Defense. . . - 3 1 6State challenges for cause. . . . 3 2 1State challenges for cause. . . . 3 3 3Defense challenges for cause. . - 3 3 3State challenges for cause. . . . 3 3 4Defense challenges for cause. . . 3 3 5State challenges for cause. . . . 3 3 9

33 5719


46/384

1 0

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

15

16

1 7

18

1 9

2 0

21

22

2 3

2 4

2 5

26

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

Klrue7

Klrue7

M O R N I N G S E S S I O N

May 1 4 , 2009W H E R E U P O N . . .

t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o c e e d i n g s were h a d :

(Whereupon t h e d e f e n d a n t was p r e s e n t w i t h

c o u n s e l . 1

M O R N I N G S E S S I O N

May 1 4 , 2009W H E R E U P O N . . .

t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o c e e d i n g s were h a d :

(Whereupon t h e d e f e n d a n t was p r e s e n t w i t h

c o u n s e l . 1M R . O ' C A L L A G H A N : F o r t h e r e c o r d , t h i sR . O ' C A L L A G H A N : F o r t h e r e c o r d , t h i s

i s S t a t e of L o u i s i a n a v s . F e l t o n D o r se y . Thei s S t a t e of L o u i s i a n a v s . F e l t o n D o r se y . The

d e f e n d a n t i s p r e s e n t ; on h i s b e h a l f a r ed e f e n d a n t i s p r e s e n t ; on h i s b e h a l f a r e

M r . G l e n G a r r e t a n d Ms. Michelle AndrePontM r . G l e n G a r r e t a n d Ms. Michelle AndrePont

f ro m t h e , p u b l i c d e f e n d e r ' s o f f i c e . T h e r e a r ef ro m t h e , p u b l i c d e f e n d e r ' s o f f i c e . T h e r e a r e

no p r o s p e c t i v e j u r o r s p r e s e n t . P r e s e n t f o r t h eno p r o s p e c t i v e j u r o r s p r e s e n t . P r e s e n t f o r t h e

S t a t e a r e B ra dy O ' C a l l a g h a n , Dhu Thompson andDistric t Attorney Charles Scott,.

M R . G A R R E T : G l e n G a r r e t f o r t h e

S t a t e a r e B ra dy O ' C a l l a g h a n , Dhu Thompson andDistric t Attorney Charles Scott,.

M R . G A R R E T : G l e n G a r r e t f o r t h ed e f e n s e , a nd M r . G o l d e n a n d M r . M c C l a t c h e y ,

I ' m s u r e , a r e on t h e i r way.

( Wher eupon a d i s c u s s i o n o f f t h e r e c o r d was

d e f e n s e , a nd M r . G o l d e n a n d M r . M c C l a t c h e y ,

I ' m s u r e , a r e on t h e i r way.

( Wher eupon a d i s c u s s i o n o f f t h e r e c o r d was

h e l d . ) Ih e l d . ) I

M R . O ' C A L L A G H A N : Your H on o r, I ' v ei d e n t i f i e d on e a c h of t h e s e t s o f p h o t o g r a p h s ,

M R . O ' C A L L A G H A N : Your H on o r, I ' v ei d e n t i f i e d on e a c h of t h e s e t s o f p h o t o g r a p h s ,

I h a ve w r i t t e n a s m a l l h a n d w r i t t e n n umber onI h a ve w r i t t e n a s m a l l h a n d w r i t t e n n umber on

t h e b ac k of e a c h f o r r e f e r e n c e p u r p o s e s , s ot h e b ac k of e a c h f o r r e f e r e n c e p u r p o s e s , s o

t h e y c a n a l l l i t e r a l l y be on t h e s a m e p a g et h e y c a n a l l l i t e r a l l y be on t h e s a m e p a g e

w h e n d i s c u s s i n g t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h o s ew h e n d i s c u s s i n g t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h o s e

p h o t o g r a p h s .

I would a l s o n o t e t h a t t h i s m o r n i n g t h e

p h o t o g r a p h s .

I would a l s o n o t e t h a t t h i s m o r n i n g t h e

S t a t e p r o v i d e d d e f e n s e c o u n s e l w i t h a C DS t a t e p r o v i d e d d e f e n s e c o u n s e l w i t h a C D

c o n t a i n i n g a u t o p sy p ho t o s r e c e i v e d f rom

D r . . P e r e t t i j u s t t o be c l e a r f o r t h e r e c o r d .c o n t a i n i n g a u t o p sy p ho t o s r e c e i v e d f rom

D r . . P e r e t t i j u s t t o be c l e a r f o r t h e r e c o r d .

O r i g i n a l l y , t h e S t a t e h a d a u to p s y . p h o t o s t h a tO r i g i n a l l y , t h e S t a t e h a d a u to p s y . p h o t o s t h a t

i t t e n d e r e d t o d e f e n s e , t h e y were a c t u a l l yi t t e n d e r e d t o d e f e n s e , t h e y were a c t u a l l y


47/384

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

1 3

14

15

1 6

1 7

1 81 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

t a k e n b y D ep u t y J e f f Thoma s who a c c o m p a n i e d

M r . P r o c k ' s bo dy t o A r k a n s a s a n d p h o t o g r a p h e di t t h e r e . The S t a t e o n l y i n t e n d s t o u s e two

o f D r . P e r e t t i ' s a c t u a l p h o t o g ra p h s s i n c e a l lt h e o t h e r s a r e e s s e n t i a l l y d u p l i c a t i v e w i t h

t h e o n e s t h a t D ep ut y Thomas t o o k . T h a t C D a l s o

c o n t a i n s a d d i t i o n a l s t i l l f r a me s c a p t u r e d f rom

v i d e o p r e v i o u s l y t e n d e r e d t o d e f e n s e c o u n s e l

f rom a surveillance camera, I can't think of

t h e a d d r e s s - - t h e 9 0 0 0 b l o c k o f

Gr ee nw oo d S p r i n g r i d g e Road a n d a n o t h e r p h o t o

o f t h e v i c t i m b e f o r e t h i s i n c i d e n t t o be u s e d

f o r identification p u r p o s e s .

' M R . G A R R E T : Your H o no r , d e f e n s ea ck no wl ed ge s r e c e i p t o f t h e C D f r o m

M r . O ' C a l l a g h a n .T H E C O U R T : A l l r i g h t .

M R . G A R R E T : Even though M r . G o l d e n a n dM r . M c C l a t c h e y h a ve n o t a r r i v e d , w e a r ep r e p a r e d t o go f o r w a r d w i t h t h e m o t i o n i f

t h a t ' s t h e C o u r t p l e a s u r e .

T H E C O U R T : We w i l l w a i t .

M R . G A R R E T : Okay. Thank you .( Wher eupon a d i s c u s s i o n o f f t h e r e c o r d was ~

h e l d . )

M R . G A R R E T : We a r e n o t s u r e t h a tM r . Go l de n i n t e n d s t o a t t e n d . S o g o i n g Iw i t h o u t h i m m ig ht b e t h e p r o p e r c o u r s e t o

t a k e .

T H E C O U R T : Okay . Are you re a d y to

a r g u e n o w ?

M R . G A R R E T : Yes, Y o u r H o n o r .


48/384

1

2

3

4

1 0

11

, 12

13

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

18

1 9

2 0

2 1

22

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

28

29

30

3 1

3 2

~

THE COURT: Do you wish to proceed

without Mr. Golden?

M R . GARRET: I wish to proceed withoutMr. Golden.

THE C O U R T : All right. You may.

MR. GARRET: May it please the Courtand counsel, this hearing concerns a'm ot io n

filed by the defense to exclude certain color

photographs of the scene and o f the victim andthe State has filed an opposition. We cited

in our motion fourteen Louisiana Supreme Court

cases and Article 403 of the Code of Evidence

as wel l -as several other cases. I would

normally s a y we filed fourteen supreme court

cases in support of our positions, but

actually, we filed some cases where the photos

were admitted, some where they were excluded

and some where the Court permitted a

low-contrast black and white substitution.

The different outcomes of these cases

are based on different facts. While the facts

differ, the law does not differ. It's

consistent and it applies the balancing test

of Code of Evidence, Article 4 0 3 of the

probative value versus prejudicial effect. 'We believe in this case the facts at

issue can be shown through testimony by the

coroner, by the police officers, and there is

no probative value to these photographs and,

of course, if there's no probative value, the

prejudicial effect would outweigh. We also

have stated we are prepared to enter into a

6 5 7 2 9


49/384


50/384

necessary or material evidence in a criminal

prosecution, it should be excluded. I'm

sorry. That was S t a t e v. M o r g a n .

In S t a t e v. Mor r i s which we cited,

1 5 7 S o . 2 d . 7 2 8 , t h e C o u r t said t h a t t h e t e s t

of admissibility is whether unpleasant,

gruesome or horrifying photographs as well as

the probative value of the photographs

outweighs the probable prejudicial effect.

Accordingly, photographs should be excluded

where their logical relevancy will

unquestionably be overwhelmed by the

inherently prejudicial nature of the

particular picture. And photographs which are

calculated to arouse the sympathies or

prej,udices of a jury are properly excluded ifthey are entirely irrelevant or not

substantially necessary to show material facts

or conditions.

And in this instance, as we do not

believe there is any issue concerning the

facts and as we are willing to enter a

stipulation, we do not believe that they are

substantially necessary.

1

In State v. Lindsay, 404 S o . 2 d . 466, itsaid that the nature of photographs so

gruesome as to overwhelm reason and cause a

jury to lose sight of the need for a

prosecutor to establish with sufficient

independent evidence the guilt of the accused,

they must be relevant to describe the person,

place or thing. A stipulation to the matter

I


51/384

1

2

6

7

8

9

1 0

11

1 2

1 3

14

1 5

1 6

17

1 9

2 0

2 '1

2 3

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 82 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

~~

sought to be proved by the p h o t o g r a p h s

necessarily bears upon a balancing of the

probative value of the photographs and their

prejudicial effect.

Now, some language in this case and in

a n o t h e r c a s e , i t t a l k s a b o u t t h e l e g i t i m a t e

moral force of the State's case. We don't

take issue with the concept that the State is

entitled to a legitimate moral force of its

case. We want to be able to maintain a

legitimate moral f o r c e o f o u r c a s e a s w e l l .

The Court does not define "moral force." It

does not describe it. It does not give any

parameters. It does not state what it is. I

d o n ' t k n o w t h a t it's c l e a r w h e t h e r moral force

applies to the penalty phase or the guilt

phase; however, one thing that is clear i sthat moral force does not say moral

ascendancy.

The defendant has a presumption of

innocence, the State has the burden of proof,

and I do not believe that we should relax the

rules of evidence for the State and the State

alone, so that it could assume any moral

superiority with the jury with regard to

witnesses or evidence or argument. So

whatever moral force means, we are for it, and

we want the same thing.

In S t a t e v. Wa t s o n , 449 So. 2d. 1321,

it says postmortem photographs of ,a murder

victim are admissible to prove corpus delicti,

to corroborate other evidence establishing the


52/384

1

2

3

4

5

'6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1 4

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3 1

32

~~ ~

cause of death and to provide positive

identification. I do not believe those

photographs will be necessary to prove any of

t h o s e i t e m s , Your Honor. It also says that an

offered stipulation bears upon the balancing

test.

I'm almost done with cases.

S t a t e v . M y l e s , 389 S o . 2d. 12, the picture tow h i c h t h e d e f e n d a n t o b j e c t s i s a low contrast

black and white made at the morgue showing

only the victim's head and a probe inserted in

the two gunshot wounds. The Court also refused

to admit a color photograph of the same scene.

S o in this case, th e Court permitted low

contrast black and white as being less

prejudicial and did n o t . a l l o w the State to putin color photographs.

Now, one case in which the Court

admitted evidence is S t a t e v . K i r k p a t r i c k ,

443 S o . 2d. 546. The four color photographs

in that case depicted the murder scene as it

was found. And that is not the case wit.h thephotographs we have at issue.

We hlave at issue photographs after thebody was moved. We have photographs after the

coroner altered it. We have photographs that

are just gruesome.

J

I have two more I want to bring to the

Court's attention, S t a t e v . P r e j e a n ,

379 So. 2d.' 240. The defendant contends,however, that in light of the stipulation he

offered as to the circumstances of the case,

10 5 7 2 6


53/384

1

2

3

4

5

6

10

11

12

1 3

14

1 5

1 6

1'7

1 81 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

23

24

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

30

31

3 2

._&>.'i

the pictures had no probative value

whatsoever. That is the situation we are

requesting. Obviously, we cannot solely enter

into a stipulation. The State would have to

agree. It is our desire to do so.

T h e p r o po s i t i o n t h a t w h e r e t h e

defendant stipulated to excluding all the

photographs - - I'm sorry - - the defense

stipulated to all the facts to which allegedly

gruesome photographs would be relevant, the

Trial Court would act properly in excluding

the photographs from evidence.

I

I

IAnd the last one I want to cite is

where they were admitted. This is

4 5 7 So. 2 d . 6 1 6 - - a n d a l l of these a r e i n ourmotion - - the Court said it was error to allow

introduction of photographs of the victim's

mutilated body. This evidence was relevant - -

I'm sorry. It was not error to allow

introduction of photographs of the victim's

mutilated body. This evidence was relevant to

whether the murder was committed in an

especially cruel, heinous and atrocious manner

which is not at issue in this case. And its

probative value for this purpose outweighs its

prejudicial effect. And again those facts are

not operative in this case.

I

And so, Your Honor, the judges and the

trial courts involved have come to different

conclusions based on the facts of the case. I Ithink the facts are very consistent and the

findings are very consistent that unless the I


54/384


55/384

1 0

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

of force used on his head was inconsistent

with an accidental blow. The number of

strikes to his head is inconsistent with an

accidental killing. And the defense can't

stipulate to specific intent if t h e y are

disputing identity. They can't say, well, it

wasn't our guy, but whoever it was intended to

kill. I f they were going to stipulate to

identity and intent, perhaps we're - - at that

p o i n t , w e a r e a t a g u i l t y p l e a , w e m i g h t a s

well do that. What the defense seeks to do is

essentially strip the prosecution's case of

detail. It attempts to strip it o f its moral

force and replace that instead with dry

testimony that could be extremely confusing to

the jury.

We are talking about the coroner

explaining the subgaleal hemorrhages and

testifying about skull beveling. These are not

things that without visual corroboration a

typical juror is likely to understand.

As I go through the photographs, what I

would like to do, if the Court could follow

along, is direct the Court's attention to what

the State needs each picture for. We have

carefully whittled down from dozens of w h a t I

would call explicit photographs down to the

ones we presented to Your Honor. I would like

proceed through them and explain to the Court

why we need each of them.

I am going through numerical order. We

have numbered these now, and I would assume a I


56/384

copy will be placed in the record, they are

handmarked on the back with the numbers to

which I am referring. The photograph number

one was taken of the victim Joe Prock after

the crime scene had already been processed.

His hands are bagged. This photograph is

essential because it was taken by Fire Marshal

Jim Alexander. Now, Fire Marshal

Jim Alexander does an analysis of the house

and does a reconstruction of the points of

origin of the fire, and one of the factors

that he had to examine in determining where

the different fires were, was the fire that

w a s p l a c e d on J o e P r o c k ' s body made a t the

same location where Ms. Prock said it was, in

the rear family room, and was that an

independent source of ignition. That is

relevant because aggravated arson is an

element of the charge in this case. So we

should be permitted to present that evidence

to corroborate and support Mr. Alexander's

testimony, and his observations of Joe's body

that night was part of his determination.

I would also note that the notion that

black and white photographs could be

substituted, I understand that in some cases

where they could be the case, the problem is,

Mr. Prock is horribly burned and the

differential in skin color from that burning

is necessary for the witnesses to be able to

opine about what their observation of the

body told them. And to suggest that

145 7 3 0


57/384


58/384

This shows what the firemen did with

the Joe's body. This shows where they had tomove him and the steps they took to preserve

the integrity of his condition and shield him

from the view of others. It also depicts, of

cours,e, the binding on his ankles which isrelevant to the element of kidnapping which is

also a predicate felony for first degree

murder.

As to State's Exhibit 3, Y o u r ' H o n o r ,this is a photograph showing J o e ' s condition

as observed by the crime scene personnel.

What we are talking about here is crime scene

personnel who were trying to reconstruct and

determine the sequence of events. Now, they

have an account from Ms. Bobbie P r o c k , but sheis extremely distraught. She's in the

emergency room being treated for burns and

smoke inhalation. It's relevant to their

investigation to show what Joe's condition was

at the time and the condition in which they

identified' him and the extent of the burn s.

around his clothing.

As to State's Exhibit 4, this shows the

fact that Joe's body was still producing

blood. You know, one of the issues is the

manner and cause of death, and while the

defense claims they want to stipulate, again,

the problem is, we have to talk about the

mechanism of death. We have to talk about

what that me'ans about what w e a p o n . w a s used.So since a mere stipulation to cause is


59/384

somewhat meaningless and empty in this case,

I we need to be able to talk about the fullcircumstances of Joe's condition. This

photograph shows that his body was still

producing blood while on the scene. It shows

the burn and it does allow for the witnesses

who were able to identify Joe before turning

him over to testify as to what they saw in

making that identification.

As to photograph five, this is a

photograph from a scene that is not extremely

close-up. While discoloration is visible on

Joe, I think it's arguable that it's explicit.

What it does show is that he was bound and

placed outside of the house b y the firemen.

They will be here to elaborate on exactly to

what extent they turned Joe. In fact, defense

counsel's argument sort of turns on itself

because they had to move Joe, looking at his

body on the scene was important in knowing how

he was positioned inside the house. If you

don't look at where burns were, you can't tell

which side he was lying on and all of those

things, so by examining where the burns are,

they were able to reach conclusions about how

he was positioned when he was beaten and

burned. I believe that that photograph is

admissible and relevant for that purpose.

As to photograph six, again, this is

clearly not an explicit photograph. It

permits a degree of detail to identify the

Christmassy nature of the tape that was used


60/384

,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1 5

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3 1

32

to bind Joe's ankles and is in no way

prejudicial.

Photograph seven is a clear

identificat,ion on-the-scene photograph. It'swhen they have turned Joe to the side to allow

everyone to view his face and confirm that

that is in fact who they were dealing with,

the extent, nature and positioning of his

injuries on the scene prior to any, as the

defense alleges, alternation by the coroner.

As to State Exhibit 8 , this is aclose-up photograph depicting the extent of

the injuries to Joe's wrists and the fact that

t h e y were v e r y t i g h t l y b o u n d . I b e l i e v e t h a t

clearly since kidnapping is an element and a

predicate felony for first degree murder that

the fact that the victim was bound with his

hands behind his back by telephone cord is

immensely relevant and appropriate for the

, determination as well as its consequences for

arson and the other elements of the offense.

THE COURT: I'm sorry. One question.

This is the hand, correct?

MR. O'CALLAGHAN: Yes, sir. Those arehis hands. It is a close-up photograph of his

hands bound behind his back with the telephone

cord.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you.

MR. O'CALLAGHAN: State's Exhibit 9,this is where we are getting into what the

defense alleges about the alterations to the

body. NOW, clearly, the coroner did have to

185 7 3 4


61/384


62/384

I 2I 3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

where the scalp has been peeled back. Again,

this is where the coroner has done exploratoryL

procedures to see the depth and extent of the

injuries, and it shows two very essential

things. One is it does show the d e p t h . a n ds e v e r i t y of one o f t h e i n j u r i e s t o Mr. P r o c k ' shead. It also shows on the part of the scalp

that many of the other wounds that did not

actually penetrate the skull did completely

penetrate the scalp. I believe - - I'm not a

doctor - - but I believe those are the

subgaleal hemorrhages that he talks about in

his coroner's report. Again, I d o n ' t know whata subgaleal hemorrhage is until Dr. Peretti

e x p l a i n s i t , showing me t h i s p i c t u r e , and I'm

a lawyer who has prosecuted dozens of homicide

cases. To ask the jury to just get it from

'I subgaleal hemorrhage, I I think is prejudicial

' to the ability of the State to present its

case and meet its burden of proof.

Photograph 11 is a similar photograph

again showing the injuries through the scalp

and a different point of impact on Joe's

skull, showing again penetration o f the skull.

State's Exhibit 12 is a photograph

prior to the removal of the scalp, and this is

an essential photograph as well because what

is of great importance is the shape, depth and

nature of the wounds to Mr. P r o c k ' s scalp. Oneof the elements that the State will intend to

prove is identity. And again, I doubt the

defense is willing to stipulate to identity


63/384

3

4

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

0I'\ ''1 5since, you know, that would pretty much be a

guilty plea. A gun was recovered where

Mr. Dorsey lived, and we have witnesses that

are going to place that gun in his hand. The

bottom of that gun s h a p e is e n t i r e l yconsistent with some of the i n j u r i e s . i n f l i c t e d

Ito Mr. Prock's scalp. The State should beentitled to show the shape of those injuries

and their depth and then show that Mr. Dorsey

had a gun perfectly consistent with inflicting

exactly those types of injuries. That goes

directly to identity, and it again goes to

intent to kill and being armed with a

dangerous weapon which is an element for the

aggravated kidnapping alleged b y the State.

The next photograph No. 13 shows again

in even greater detail, but from a different

angle, the injures to Mr. P r o c k ' s scalp,showing the shape, nature and depth of those

injuries.

State's Exhibit 14 is additional

injuries to Mr. Prock but completely different

ones from the previous two photographs. You

know, it's not the State's fault that nine

blows of nearly killing force were inflicted

to Mr. Prock's head, but the jury, I think, isentitled to know just how badly he was beaten

so there's no issues as to the intent of the

offenders.

Again, Dr. Peretti should be allowed to

talk about the types of instruments that could

cause these types of wounds and be allowed to

21 5 7 3 7


64/384

I .


65/384

1

5

6

7

8

9

10

12

13

1 4

15

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

23

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

28

2 9

3 0

31

3 2

Dr. Peretti to opine about the duration of

which - - of the burns to Mr. Prock; in other

words, how long was he burning before the fire

was put out. It allows him to make certain

observations a b o u t t h e t i s s u e u n d e r n e a t h t h e

burn as to whether or not Mr. Prock was alive

at the time he was set on fire which he was.

It allows him to reach several conclusions

about Mr. P r o c k ' s condition, and it does alsoidentify Mr. P r o c k a s the person upon whom all

the other autopsy photos were being performed.

So I mean, ,we have got sixteen

photographs here, two of them are clearly not

even within the bounds of 'gr uesome or

explicit, and the others each show some

independent fact or corroborates some

independent fact beyond mere cause of death.

And what all the cases that Mr. Garret

cites talk about is in fact the balancing

test. And it would be prejudicial t o the State

if we were forced to have a cold stipulation

as to cause of death but not talk about how

those causes were consistent with the weapon

Mr. Dorsey had, how those causes were

consistent with an intent to kill, how those

causes were consistent with kidnapping a

person, how those causes were consistent with

the aggravated arson of Ms. Bobbie Prock's

home.

It also does have some relevance as to

corroborate the nature and extent of

Ms. Bobbie Prock's situation. She's going'to


66/384

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

1 8

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3 1

32

come in here and testify after having been

through this, and her state of mind at the

time is something that is fair game for both

sides to talk about. I think that the jurors

should be entitled to know what she was

looking at when her state of mind was formed.

You know, her ability to recall facts and her

ability to assess details may be slightly

impaired by the fact that she saw her son in

this condition. We're not offering it to

prejudice the jury, but I think we're entitled

to do anything we can within the bounds of

evidence to show why a witness might not have

had every cool reflection in their observation

of the crime that was being perpetrated on

them.

So I believe that the purposes and the

probative value of these photographs is way

beyond merely cause of death. I believe that

if the defense were to offer to stipulate to

any of the other facts that we get into

dangerous areas where you're now stripping the

State of its case. You know, the defense is

not allowed - - and it's clear from cases that

both the defense and the State cite - - is not

allowed to simply stipulate away the State's

case and leave us to come in with one piece of

evidence and say, well, yeah, all that stuff,

we all agree, but, you know, it was him. So

since they are not stipulating to identity,

since the; can't logically stipulate tointent, we s h o u l d t b e allowed to present all


67/384

1

2

ITHE COURT: You may.MR. GARRET: Thank you.Mr. O'Callaghan has addressed w h a t he believes

I

Dr. Peretti can and can't do, and he is a I

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

1 3

14

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

24

2 5

2 6

2 7

28

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

_ _ _ _ ~

evidence of the predicate felonies and the

designate. Dr. Peretti is an expert in

describing wounds to a jury. He has not

indicated anytime to us that he'nee ded

photographs to do that, and he appears to be

quite able to carry on that part of the proof.

I a l s o think that we are conf usi ng -the

guilt phase with the penalty phase. The guilt

phase does not involve mitigating and

aggravating factors. The State either proves

its case beyond a reasonable doubt or it

doesn't. Extent, depth, et cetera, those may

be relevant to the penalty phase, but I mean,

we are not going to contest that the victim is

deceased.

Now, Mr. O'Callaghan has tried todismiss the possibility of a stipulation. He

said a couple of things. He says that there

are things that we won't stipulate to. Well,

we're probably the best source of what we will

stipulate to. He has said a stipulation would

strip away the State's case and only permit

2 5


68/384

1

1 23

~4,I 5

6

7

' 89

1 0

I

I

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

them with one item of proof. I suspect they

wouldn't sign such a stipulation, so I don't

think that's really a danger.

In terms of how the fire occurred, the

police know how the fire occurred. It's in

their police reports. There is no lack of

evidence there. We are looking for a

substantial necessity because of a failure of

evidence, and that's not here.

The State has said we can't stipulate

to specific intent. Specific intent is not a

fact to stipulate. Specific intent is a

conclusion that the jury reaches or not based

on the evidence. And whether or not there are

i n t e r n a l i n j u r i e s , a g a i n , p e r h a p s f o r t h e

penalty phase a s to whether the victim

suffered or not', how badly the victim was

beaten, again, we're not contesting he's still

alive. This would merely be something more for

the penalty phase.

Deep and profound fractures, I think is

probably more relevant to the penalty phase.

The depth and nature of the injuries, we think

Dr. Peretti is well able, well experienced, I

see no evidence that he is unable to express

himself in a way that jurors can understand so

that his testimony would be meaningless.

The bottom line here is, this evidence

is not essential. It does not have a

substantial necessity to be entered. It is, in

fact, incredibly prejudicial. Incredibly

gruesome photographs. And all of the reasons


69/384

We think everything that the State wants to

show that Mr. O ' C a l l a g h a n just said they wantto show can be shown, and that obviates the

substantial necessity, and t h a t means all we

are left with is photographs that I think we

would ask for their exclusion.

M R . O'CALLAGHAN: May I respond t o j u s ta few o f t h o s e t h i n g s .

THE COURT: You may.

MR. O'CALLAGHAN: First of all, I don'tknow i f Mr. G a r r e t h a s t a l k e d t o Dr. P e r e t t i ,but I have and he says, just look at the

pictures, it makes it a lot clearer. So the

notion that he doesn't need the pictures to

explain himself when he's talking to an

experienced homicide prosecutor and still

says, let's l o o k at the pictures is, to me,

simply inaccurate.

Mr. Garret implied that all of the

things we're talking about wanting to prove

are things for the penalty phase, but they are

not. Aggravated arson is a predicate felony

for the crime not the penalty but the crime of

first degree murder. Kidnapping i s a predicate

felony for the crime, not the penalty, of

first degree murder. And the intent to kill

more than one person is an aggravating

circumstance for the guilt phase as well as

the penalty phase of first degree murder. So

I lsll

fI3-1E9dOb8llhlp"'8ql49


70/384

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1 7

18

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

26

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

all of these things are wrapped inextricably

to the State's burden of proof.

Basically, you know, the fact that the

police reached the determination in their

reports doesn't change the fact that it was

based on observation and evidence and that

they should be allowed to explain the validity

of that observation and evidence. And the

notion that the depth of wounds is not

relevant to proving specific intent, that

that's some conclusion, I mean, Mr. Garret

kind of made my argument for me, specific

intent is a conclusion you reach on looking at

the facts. Well, if they can't look at the

facts, you know, how they can they reach that

conclusion? There were deep injuries to his

head doesn't do it. There were deep injuries,

repeated injuries, multiple injuries and

here's what they were, and they came from an

item just like this weapon, that goes to

identity and specific intent.

And I did also not address, but I

would, you know, remind the Court, you know,

there were troubling allegations in defense's

motion about a purportedly threatening e-mail.

I provided the Court with a copy of that

e-mail. You know, as I said in my response,

you know, I'm at a loss to see what part of

take care, t h a n k s ' f o r your courtesy, and we'rereserving our rights to litigate a question is

in any way threatening. And I did feel that

that was a fairly strong allegation to make

2 8 5 7 4 4 :


71/384

--..

1

2

3

4

5

9

1 0

11

1 2

1 3

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

28

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

based on my e-mail. That's all I have.

MR . GARRET: Your Honor, I just want toremind the Court in our motion aside from

asking for the exclusion of these materials,

if the Court admits them, and we disagree

strongly that they should be admitted, I want

to remind the Court that we have also asked

for low contrast black and whites instead

Iwhich if the Court disagrees with us on the

exclusion we feel would adequately serve all

the needs here.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you both

for your arguments. In connection with the

Imotion to suppress gruesome guilt phasephotographs in evidence, I do not find, first

of all, that all of the photographs are

explicit; however, the photographs that are in

question, if relevant or admissible, if the

probative value, outweighs its prejudicial

impact. The State has gone through the

photos, at least sixteen - - and they are color

p h o t o s - - and stated its reasons and purposefor wanting to admit such photographs into

evidence in this particular case. Based upon

the reasons stated by the State, the Court

I

I

finds that the photographs have their

relevancy. In addition, the Court finds that

the probative value would outweigh any

prejudicial effect in this case. I believe

sufficient reasons have been stated by the

State, and therefore the Court will deny the

motion to suppress gruesome guilt phase


72/384

1

2

3

4

8

9

10

1 1

1 2

1 3

14

15

16

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

photographs in evidence.

I would note the defense's objection to

the Court's ruling for the record; however, I

do believe that the State has a right to

p r e s e n t its c a s e . They c a r r y t h e b u rd e n o f

proof. I do not believe that black and white

photos would have the effect that the defense

argues in this matter, and I believe that the

State has a right to present its case.

Because it carries the burden of proof, it has

a right to present the color photos. I do not

find any relevant reasons stated why the color

photos should not be allowed and should be

r e p l a c e d w i t h b l a c k a n d w h i t e p h o t o s , so t h a t

request is also denied.

And your objection, Mr. Garret, to the

Court's ruling is noted for the record.

M R . GARRET: Thank you, Your Honor.MR. O'CALLAGHAN: Your Honor, I would

ask, with the Court's permission, that the

Court place its copy of the photographs in

record.

(Whereupon a discussion o f f the record was

held. )

(Whereupon the foregoing exhibits were filed

into the record.)

THE COURT: For the record, during this

argument on the motion to suppress, the jury

was not present. It was done outside the

presence of the jury.L

So the first person on the prospective

list will be Mr. Posey from yesterday's panel,

305 7 4 6


73/384

t_-._ --.

9

10

11

1 2

13

1 4

15

16

17

i a19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

2829

30

31

32

'1 :I- _.-e

a'"Pl*uI ;e

a n d t h e r e a r e a t l e a s t f i f t e e n o t h e r s .

( W h e r e u p o n a d i s c u s s i o n o f f t h e r e c o r d was

h e l d . )

M R . THOMPSON: We w i l l f o r m a l l y c a l lt h e c a s e o f S t a t e o f L o u i s i a n a v s .

F e l t o n D o r s e y , D o c k e t N o . 251,406. T h e

Id e f e n d a n t i s p r e s e n t w i t h t h e c o u n s e l ,M r . A l a n G o l d e n a n d M r . G l e n G a r r e t .

Dhu T h om ps on f o r t h e d i s t r i c t a t t o r n e y ' s

o f f i c e . W e a r e r e a d y t o p r o c e e d w i t h v o i r

a r e o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e j u r y w a i t i n g

o n t h e p a n e l .

( W h e r e u po n t h e v e n i r e p a n e l w a s s e a t e d i n t h e

c o u r t r o o m . )

T H E C O U R T : G o o d m o r n i n g , e v e r y o n e . I

d o a p o l o g i z e f o r t h e d e l a y . W e h a d t o t a k e u p

a f e w m a t t e r s o u t s i d e y o u r p r e s e n c e b e f o r e w e

s t a r t e d . W e a r e now r e a d y t o c o n t i n u e w i t h

j u r y s e l e c t i o n .

L e t m e , f i r s t o f a l l , s a y t h a t e v e r y

Ip e r s o n c h a r g e d w i t h a f e l o n y i n t h e S t a t e o f L o u i s i a n a i s e n t i t l e d t o a t r i a l b y j u r y

a c c o r d i ' n g t o t h e l a w s o f t h e S t a t e o f

L o u i s i a n a a n d t h o s e o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s

C o n s t i t u t i o n . I r e a l i z e t h a t i t i s a n

i n c o n v e n i e n c e f o r so m e o f y ou t o s e r v e o n t h e

j u r y ; h o w e v e r , i t i s n e c e s s a r y f o r yo u t o

s e r v e i n o r d e r f o r o u r s y s t e m o f j u s t i c e t o

f u n c t i o n p r o p e r l y .

I w o u l d a l s o l i k e t o t a k e t h i s t i m e t o

31 5 7 4 7


74/384

I1

2

3

4

5

I

6

I8

9

10

11

1 2

1 3

14

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

r e a d t o y o u t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s t h a t a r e

r e q u i r e d o f y o u i n o r d e r t o s e r v e o n t h e j u r y .

O n e , y o u m u s t be a c i t i z e n o f U n i t e d S t a t e s

a n d o f t h e S t a t e o f L o u i s i a n a a n d h a v e r e s i d e d

i n C a d d o P a r i s h f o r a t l e a s t o n e y e a r p r i o r t ot o d a y . T w o , yo'u m u s t b e a t l e a s t e i g h t e e n

y e a r s o f a g e . T h r e e , y o u m u s t a b l e t o r e a d ,

w r i t e a n d s p e a k t h e E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e . F o u r ,

y o u m u s t b e n o t i n t e r d i c t e d o r i n c a p a b l e o f

s e r v i n g b e c a u s e of's m e n t a l o r p h y s i c a li n f i r m i t y . F i v e , y o u m u s t n o t b e u n d e r

i n d i c t m e n t f o , r a f e l o n y n o r c o n v i c t e d o f af e l o n y f o r w h i c h y ou h a v e n o t b e e n p a r d o n e d .

I f a n y o f y o u f e e l t h a t y o u d o n o t m e e t

t h e n e c e s s a r y qualifications, w o u l d y o u p l e a s e

f o r m a 1 i n . e o n t h e w a l l o v e r h e r e b e h i n d t h er a i l , a n d I w i l l be h a p p y t o t a l k t o a b o u t

t h a t .

( N o r e s p o n s e . )T H E C O U R T : A l s o , s o m e o f y o u may h a v e

r e a s o n s t h a t y o u f e e l t h a t y o u c a n n o t s e r v e .

I w a n t t o s a y t o y o u t h a t I a m v e r y l i m i t e d i n

t h e r e a s o n s t h a t I c a n e x c u s e y ou f r o m j u r y

d u t y . I n a d d i t i o n , a s I s t a t e d e a r l i e r , i n

o r d e r f o r o u r s y s t e m t o s u r v i v e , w e m u s t h a v e

w i l l i n g j u r o r s t h a t a r e w i l l i n g t o s e r v e o n

t h e j u r y . L e t m e s e e i f t h e r e i s a n y o n e w i t h

a n y p l a n n e d s u r g e r i e s o r t h i n g s o f t h a t

n a t u r e , i f y o u w o u l d , s h ow m e y o u r h a n d s .

T h e r e i s o n e . C a n y o u co me o v e r h e r e

a n d l e t m e t a l k t o y o u .

I s t h e r e a n y o n e w i t h p l a n n e d v a c a t i o n ?

I I


75/384

8

910

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3 1

32

(No response. )

THE COURT: Is there anyone who also

feel that they cannot serve on the jury for

any reason?

Two. All right.

(Whereupon a discussion off the record was

held.

THE COURT: Can you all approach.

(Whereupon a side-bar discussion o f f the

record was held.)

THE COURT: Ms. Holmes, you are free to

leave.

Ms. Bennett, you are free to leave.

Ms. H e a b l e , you are free to leave.And, Mr. Posey, you are free to leave.

(Whereupon the aforesaid venire members were

excused from the panel.)

THE COURT: Again, welcome to the

First Judicial District Court. This is a

criminal section of court. This trial is

scheduled to last approximately two weeks.

This is a sequestered trial. You will not be

sequestered today or tomorrow; however, at

some point, possibly Saturday, we will begin

selecting jurors and we will begin

sequestering jurors. And that is commonly

referred to as a lock-up jury, meaning, that

if selected, you will stay at hotel

accommodations, and you will be taken care of

by the sheriff's department. They will

provide your meals and things of that nature.

They will make all necessary arrangements for


76/384

10

11

1 2

1 3

14

15

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

21

22

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

28

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

y o u . A n d t h e t r i a l may l a s t a w e e k , a w e e k

a n d a h a l f a t t h a t p o i n t . S o t h i s i s w h a t w e

a r e l o o k i n g a t , a t t h i s p o i n t .

-

We a r e g o i n g t o c a l l a l l o f y o u t o t h e

j u r y b o x at this point.

( W h e r e u p o n a d i s c u s s i o n o f f t h e r e c o r d was

h e l d . )

T H E C O U R T : M a ' a m c l e r k , w o u l d yo u

p l e a s e c a l l t h e p r o s p e c t i v e j u r o r s .

W H E R E U P O N . . .

t h e f o l l o w i n g v e n i r e members w e r e s e a t e d :

J u r o r O n e : M a r k N a t a l eJuror Two: Cheryl D. T h o r n t o nJ u r o r T h r e e : J o a n n S . S t e w a r t

J u r o r F o u r : I rm a L . E d w a r d s

J u r o r F i v e : R o n a l d T . O l a g u e

J u r o r S i x : D a n n y W a l k e r

J u r o r S e v e n : M o n i c a M . H i c k s

J u r o r E i g h t : C a r l i t a R . D i x o nJ u r o r N i n e : C h a r l e s W a l t e r s , J r .

J u r o r T e n : S h a r o n S n e l l i n gJ u r o r E l e v e n : M a r v i n J e f f e r s o n

J u r o r T w e l v e : C a r r i e C l a y

J u r o r T h i r t e e n : S e t h T h o m a s

T H E C O U R T : W o u l d e a c h o f y o u p l e a s e

s t a n d , r a i s e y o u r r i g h t h a n d a n d be s w o r n .

( W h e re u p o n t h e v e n i r e p a n e l was d u l y s w o r n . )

T H E C O U R T : T h i s i s c a l l e d v o i r d i r e

e x a m i n a t i o n . T h i s i s t h e o n l y p h a s e o f t r i a l

w h e r e t h e a t t o r n e y s w i l l a s k q u e s t i o n s . You7


77/384

4

5

6

7

'8

9

10

11

1 2

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

'27

28

29

30

3 1

32

will be allowed to ask questions. Feel free

to ask any questions that you deem necessary

to ask.

If you want an explanation for

something, this is the time to ask. The

attorneys m.ay not be able to answer everyquestion; however, they will explain that to

you, but feel free to ask anything you want to

ask.

happy to give it to you. If you need them to

IIf you need an explanation, they will bel

rephrase or restate something, they will be

.happy to do that for you. If you are asked

something that you feel is too private or too

personal to be discussed in the presence of

everyone, simply say so and we will talk to

you privately about that matter outside the

presence of the other jurors.

It is important that you speak up when

Iyou are answering because the court reporter

is recording everything that is being said.

So we need you to speak up, so that she can

hear as well as the other attorneys that are

involved in the litigation.

Let me introduce the attorneys involved

in this litigation. Representing the State of

Louisiana is the elected District Attorney,

Mr. Charles Scott, Mr. Dhu Thompson, and

Mr. Brady O ' C a l l a g h a n . Representing theaccused is Mr. Alan Golden,

Mr. David M c C l a t c h e y . Ms. Michelle A n d r e P o n tstepped out for just a moment. Mr. Glen Garret

has stepped out also for just a moment. The

35


78/384

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

17

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 83 0

3 1

3 2

Iaccused is Felton Dorsey.

Again, there are no right and wrong

answers. The best answer is a truthful

a n s w e r .

With that, is the State to ready

proceed.

MR. THOMPSON: We are, Your Honor.\ (Whereupon a P o w e r P o i n t presentation prepared

by t h e S t a t e was d i s p l a y e d t o t h e v e n i r e

panel. )

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION

BY M R . THOMPSON:Q. Good morning,' ladies and gentlemen.

As previously introduced, my name i s

Dhu Thompson, and I'm an assistant district

attorney here in C a d d o Parish. And I'mjoining Mr. Brady O ' C a l l a g h a n along with thedistrict attorney, Mr. Charles Scott, as a

prosecution team here in the case o f State of

Louisiana vs. Felton Dorsey.

As the judge has indicated, this is a

first degree murder charge, and it carries a

capital punishment sentence option in this

case. So, ladies and gentlemen, let me start

off by stating that I know this might be the

first time some of you have ever been in court

in this type of situation, and I know it might

be a little intimidating at this time.

What I'm going to try to do is to

relax you in your seats to tell you that, as

the judge stated, there's no right or wrong


79/384


80/384


81/384

I

1

2

I3

4

5

6

7

89

10

11

12

1 3

14

, 1 516

17

1 8

1 9

20

2 1

22

2 3

24

2 5

2 6

2 7

that guy walked? Have you ever seen that

situation.

A. (By Ms. Dixon) Yes.

Q. Ms. Hicks, have you ever seen an

election, you know, over the last ten years,

whether it be a local, state o r national

election, where you said, I can't believe that

guy won, or, I can't believe that guy lost?

A. (By Ms. Hicks) Right.

Q. Now, Mr. Thomas, if you don't vote i nthat election, you can't complain about the

results?

A. (By M r . Thomas) No.

Q. Ms. Thornton, to that extent, if the'

j u r o r s didn't p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s p r o c e s s ,

c o u l d t h e r e e v e r b e a c o m p l a i n t t h a t t h e

system is not working?

A. (By Ms. Thornton) No.

Q. Okay. Ms. Stewart, the same line of

questioning, in reference to the integrity of

the system, do you agree or disagree that

without jury participation that the system

would crumble?

A. (By Ms. Stewart) I agree.

Q. To that extent, ladies and gentlemen,with this, I want to stress the importance

that if you're able and willing to serve on

this jury, the system, the integrity of the

system needs the participation of good jurors

in our parish in order to keep the system

running, especially with these type of

important cases.

3 9


82/384

I 2

I 34

5

6

8

9

11

1 2

1 3

14

15

16

17

18

19

2 0

21 '22

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

27

2 829

3 0

3 1

3 2

Ladies and gentlemen, we have two

phases of the voir dire here. As indicated by

the Court and as charged by the district

attorney's office, this is a capital case.

So at this point in the voir dire, we are

t a l k i n g a b ou t t h r e e s p e c i f i c a r e a s r i g h t now.

The first topic will be sequestration. The

next topic I am going to discuss is pretrial

publicity, and then the third topic, this is

going to be the most important topic that I'm

going to c o v e r in r e f e r e n c e t o who c a n q u a l i f y

t o s i t on this jury.

NOW, I know some of you may have

never thought about this issue or, if you

thought about it, you thought about it i npassing as far as your internal views and

opinions about the death penalty. But as I

throw this out to you in the beginning, I want

you to start internally thinking about what is

your opinion about the death penalty because,

keep in mind, we are going to be asking you

later on in this presentation whether it's a

punishment that you can seriously consider or

whether it would be a punishment that you

could impose if the evidence merits it. Now,

keep in mind, this is where we are going to

seek honest answers.

And as a prosecutor who's done plenty

of these cases, I've heard every answer in the

book. I've heard people say that they can't

do it under any circumstances. I've heard

people say that I ' l l do it no matter what the

40


83/384

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3 1

32

evidence is. I've heard people say I' m

neutral to either side. We have heard the

whole spectrum of answers so, keep in mind,

ladies and gentlemen, when we get to that

topic there's no right or wrong answer. So I

hope that starts your thinking as far as your

opinion on that important topic.

Let me talk to you about the

sequestration. When we talk about

sequestration, that means no contact with

anyone. Once sequestration begins the sheriff

will take custody of you and that doesn't mean

you go to the C a d d o Correctional Center. Thatmeans you are going to go to a nice hotel. As

the judge indicated, you are going to be

provided very good meals, and the sheriff's

office is going to take care of you through

the duration of the trial. You are going to

have limited TV and newspaper exposure to

maintain the integrity of the proceedings so

there is no outside influences coming in

influencing your decision when your decision

should b e based on the facts and the evidence.

Do you agree with that, Ms. Edwards?

A. (By Ms. Edwards) Yes.

Q. Do you see why they do the

sequestration process?


Q. As indicated by the Court, we are in

the continuous process of selecting this jury.

We anticipate sequestration could begin around

Friday, maybe Saturday. That is our time

41


84/384


85/384

_-

I 1

I 2

I 3~ 4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1 3

14

1 5

16

17

18

19

20

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

25

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

31

32

(Whereupon a side-bar discussion off the

record was held.)

THE COURT: Ms. Stewart, could you

approach, please.

(Whereupon a discussion off the record was

held. )

\ THE COURT: F o r t h e r e c o r d , Ms. S t e w a r t

is excused for the reasons already stated.

(Whereupon the prospective juror was excused

from the courtroom.)

BY M R . THOMPSON:Q. Ms. Edwards, I believe I left off

with you.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) (Ju'ror nods head.)

Q. O k a y . Would the sequestration p o s eany i s s u e f o r you?


Q. Could you tell me about that.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) Usually, when I get

o f f work every evening, I have to go to my

daughter's house to take care o f my

grandchildren every day because she has to be

at work from 1 2 : O O to 8 : O O every day. And soI have to be there when I get o f f work to meet

the bus when they get o f f bus. They are

elementary kids from four to eleven.

Q. These are your grandchildren?A. (By Ms. Edwards) Uh-huh.

Q. Their mother - -A. (By Ms. Edwards) Works every day.

Q. What time does the mother get o f f

work?

4 3 5 7 5 9


86/384

1

' From 1 2 : O O noon until 8 : O O at night.

5

6

7

8

t

9

10

11

12

13

14

1 5

1 6

17

18

19

2 0

2 1

22

2 3

24

2 5

26

27

28

2 9

3 0

3 1

32

A. (By Ms. Edwards) At 8 : O O at night.

Q. Are you the only relative here in

town that could assume that responsibility? I

know your daughter probably prefers you,

but - -

A. (By Ms. Edwards) Well, as far as

she's concerned, I am. I mean, other

relatives, I have would help us, too. As a

m a t t e r of f a c t , I h a v e t w o s i s t e r s .

Q. Would they be able to assume those

responsibilities if you were selected as a

juror?

A. (By Ms. Edwards) Well - -

Q . I know y ou r d a u g h t e r p r o b a b l y p r e f e r s

you.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) But my oldest sister

just got out of the hospital from a blockage.

Q. Okay.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) My other sister, I

don't know because she's at work every day. I

don't know where she is afterward.

Q. Okay. So you feel that situation may

impose an extreme hardship on you?

A. (By Ms. Edwards) Yes, because there

is no one to keep them.

Q. If you were selected as a juror in

this case and you weren't able to make any

accommodations, how would that affect you as a

juror?

A. (By Ms. Edwards) (No response.)

Q. I'll accept whatever answer you give

4 4


87/384

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 81 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4 .2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

me.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) It would affect me

pretty bad.

Q. How would it affect you? Just give me

your best explanation. I

A. (By Ms. E d w a r d s ) In my bestI

explanation, I wouldn't be here.

Q. Do you feel you might be distractedfrom these proceedings?

A. (By Ms. Edwards) No.

Q. W o u l d y o u feel like you could stillI

pay attention to the facts and evidence and

the witnesses?


Q. If we were to allow you to make

accommodations to see if another relative or a

family friend here in town could take care of

that responsibility, would that alleviate your

hardship?


Q . We can certainly make thoseaccommodations to allow you to do that.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) Okay.

Q . Mr. Olague, d i d I say your namecorrectly?

A. (ByMr. Olague) 0-la-GEE. An 1 1 0 , " and"leg" and an "E."

Q . All right. Mr. Olague, do you haveany issues with the sequestration topic?

A. (By Mr. Olague) No, sir.

Q. You would be able to serve as a

sequestered juror?


88/384

10

11

12

1 3

~

A. (By Mr. Walker) Well, privately.

Q. Do you want to discuss it in private?A. ( B yM r . W a l k e r ) Y e s .

Q. Okay. I ' l l make that accommodation.Ms. Clay.

A. (By Ms. Clay) It would be

14

15

1 6

17

18

19

2 0

21

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

31

3 2

A. (By Mr. Olague) Yes.

Q. Mr. Walker.

A. (By Mr. Walker) I've got a situation

this weekend, but c a n n o t b e c a n c e l e d , a n d it'san activity that has been planned for a year.

Q. Is that something you mind discussing

here?

inconvenient, but it would b e okay.

Q. Jury service is always inconvenientto everybody, but what we're seeking is

whether anybody has any extreme hardships. So

you would be able to serve as a sequestered

juror?

A. (By Ms. Clay) My husband is a youth

minister, but he could do without me for a

little while.

Q. I normally get a good response from

married couples with children.

A. (By Ms. Clay) I don't have any kids.

I've one on the way, but I don't have any kids

here.

Q. I've heard them say, sign me up, I

need the vacation.

A. (By Ms. Clay) I've got a vacation to

work on, so it's okay.

Q. Mr. Jefferson.


89/384

1

2

3

4

5

9

10

11

12

1 3

14

1 5

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3 1

32

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) It would bebecause it's two weeks.

Q. Okay.A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Because of my

financial situation that would be the only

hardship I would have.

Q. I'm sorry?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) The only hardship

I would have is because of the two weeks I'm

off work.

Q. Where do you work?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Republic

Contractors.

Q . What type of work do you do there?A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Plumber.

Q. Are you an hourly employee?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Yes.Q. Is it fair to say that if you don't

work, you don't get paid?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Correct.

Q. I'm assuming your boss won't make anyaccommodations to that effect?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) I would have to

ask him about that.

Q. You would have to ask him. If hewere to make those accommodations to your

salary, would that alleviate your hardship?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Yeah.

Q . If he wasn't able to make thoseaccommodations, that would pose an extreme

economic hardship?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Well, not extreme

47


90/384

1

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1 5

1 6

1 7

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 .

27

28

29

30

31

32

Cd '

because God handles all my affairs.

Q. So let me ask you this,notwithstanding what you have just stated,

would you be able to serve as a sequestered

juror if maybe we were to allow you to check

o n t h o s e h a r d s h i p s i n r e f e r e n c e t o y o u r b o s s

giving your salary during your jury service?

A. (By Mr. Jefferson) Yes.

Q. Any other hardships we need to know

a b o u t ?

A. (ByMr. Jefferson) No.

Q. Ms. Snelling.A. (By Ms. Snelling) Yes. I work for

the school system, and I do evaluations. I

have fourteen evaluations in the process right

now. It's the last weeks of school. Theyhave to be completed in these last two weeks.

I also tutor high school students for finals,

and it would be very difficult for them to

find another tutor at this late date.

Q. Okay. Having a mother who is a school

teacher, I understand.

A. (By Ms. Snelling) My father also has

cancer and lives in Baton Rouge. He just

started treatment was yesterday. The last one

was so severe that they had hospitalize him

and if that happens again, I would have to be

with him.

Q. I'm very sorry to hear about that

situation. Ms. Snelling, I am going to make a

note here, we may readdress this issue in a

private capacity later on in the voir dire.


91/384

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

21

2 2

2 3

2 4

25

2 6

2 7

2 8

29

3 0

3 1

32

Mr. Walters.

A. (By Mr. Walters) Just two situations.

My wife has a ruptured disk and she is goes to

the neurology on the 25th to decide what kind

o f s u r g e r y that may occur , although the

surgery probably won't be schedule right away.

If it's two weeks, it's not a problem, but I

do have vacation that starts on the 7th. I

have already paid and I won't get my money

b a c k .

Q. The 7th of June?

A. (By Mr. Walters) Yeah.

Q. I hate to make a promise, but Ianticipate we'll be done by then.

A. ( B yMr. Wal ter s) As l o n g as

arrangements could made that my wife could

speak to the sheriff's department and let me

know what results are, then I have no problem.

Q. That would alleviate the hardship?

A. (By Mr. Walters) Yes.

Q. Ms. Dixon.A. (By Ms. Dixon) No.

Q . No hardships?A. (By Ms. Dixon) No.

Q. Okay. Ms. Hicks.

A. (By Ms. Hicks) I was planning to go

out of town in the morning and come back

Sunday evening.

, Q. Okay.

A. (By Ms. Hicks) And also my niece is

graduating on the 2 3 r d .Q. Your niece is graduat,ing on the 23rd

. 49


92/384

.1

which would be Saturday?

A. .(By Ms. Hicks) Saturday a week.

Q. Okay. Let me ask you this as far asyour out-of-town trip for tomorrow, is it

something that could be rescheduled if you

were selected?

A. ( B yMs. H i c k s ) W e l l , i t has b e e n

planned for several months. I'd really rather

not miss it.IQ. If you don't mind me asking, is it a

personal vacation or is it business?

A. (By Ms. Hicks) Yes, personal.

Q. I t ' s a personal vacation. Is itsomething that non-refundable?

A. (By Ms. Hicks) N o .

Q. It's n o t r e f u n d a b l e ?A. Oh, yes. It's just a camping trip

with my family.

Q. Let me pose a question to you, andI'll accept whatever answer you give me. Isit something that can be rescheduled or is

it - -

A. (By Ms. Hicks) (Juror shakes head.)

No.

Q. So let me ask you this: I f , y o u wereselected as a juror in this sequestered

manner, how would that affect you? . A n d I'llaccept whatever answer you give me.

A. (By Ms. Hicks) It's something I would

like to do. So I don't g e t . t o see my dado'ften. He lives in town, but with my job and

he goes to bed early, so we just never get to

D6C P I


93/384

10

11

12

1 3

14

15

1 6

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

visit, and he's seventy-two. And he's down at

Toledo Bend alone right now. He's expecting

all the family to come down.

Q. Would it be something that w o u l d

create a severe strain on your ability to

serve as a juror if you were selected?

A. (By Ms. Hicks) No. I would be upset.

Q. Would it be something that you might

hold against either of the parties?

A . ( B y M s . H i c k s ) M ay b e . ( L a u g h t e r . )

No.

Q. This is why I do this process.

A. (By Ms. Hicks) I would be hurt.

Q. O k a y . I guess the crunch question is,

if selected, would you be able to serve as a

juror?

A. (By Ms. Hicks) Yes, but I wouldn't

want to miss my niece's graduation.

Q. On the 2 3 r d ?A. (By Ms. Hicks) The 2 3 r d .Q. Well, Judge Mosely is very good at

making these cases go very expeditiously. So

hopefully, we will be done by then. Okay?

A. (By Ms. Hicks) (Juror nods head.)

Q. Mr. Thomas.

A. (By Mr. Thomas) I have a bicycle race

this weekend that I've already paid for which

is not a big deal.

Q. Okay.

A. (By Mr. Thomas) Then' my sister

graduates high school on the 24th.

Q. Of this month?

m61

51

5 7 6 7


94/384

A. (By Mr. Thomas) Um-hum.

Q. To the extent of your bicycle race,is that something that - -

A. (By Mr. Thomas) It's nothing that's a

big deal. It's just that it was sixty-three

dollars, and I have already paid that.

Q. I played a lot of tennis tournaments,and there has been a lot of cases where I've

had to eat my fee. So I understand that, butIto the extent that you c o u l d d o that - -I

A. (By Mr. Thomas) It's nothing severe.

Q. - - you would be able to serve. As toyour graduation on the 23rd - - is that

correct?

A. (By Mr. Thomas) The 23rd or 2 4 t h ,Sunday.

Q. I anticipate the case may be over by

then. I don't want to make any promises, but

to that extent, would you still be able to

serve as a juror in this case?

A. (By Mr. Thomas) Yes.

Q. Is there anybody else that hasanything they want to add to their answer

before I move to the next topic.

Yes, ma'am, Ms. Edwards.

A. (ByMs. Edwards) I do. If I am

selected, would my job be informed?

Q. Yes, ma'am.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) Okay.

Q. We will allow you to make

accommodations to inform your job and, if

needed, there can be notifications to confirm

I


95/384

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1 5

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

3 1

32

.-..

I .._

that you are indeed here in a sequestered

manner.

A. (By Ms. Edwards) I told my students

yesterday and this morning.

Q. You p u t them o n n o t i c e .A. (By Ms. Edwards) Yes.

Q. Ms. Clay, did you have your hand up?A. (By Ms. Clay) Would we start tomorrow

if we got picked?

Q - No, 'ma'am. We're s t i l l i n t h eprocess of selection.

A. (By Ms. Clay) Oh, okay. I was just

wondering because I have an appointment at

9 : 3 0 in the morning.Q. You should be able to make that

appointment tomorrow.

A. (By Ms. Clay) Okay.

Q. Is there anybody else that has any'

questions .or wants to add to their answer?

Yes, ma'am, Ms. Thornton.

A. (By Ms. Thornton) I do have vacation

planned for the day after Memorial Day, that

week. I don't know what that - -

Q. That would be the 2 6 t h , 27th.A. (By Ms. Thornton) Do you think it

would be through by then?

Q. Once again, I hate to promise that

and then we roll into week three, but we're

going to try our best to keep within the time

frames that we have given out to the jurors.

A. ( B y Ms. Thornton) Okay.

Q. To that extent, would that help with


96/384

-.

I 1

2

~

3

4

10

11

12

1 3

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

26

. 2 728

29

30

31

32

your hardship?

A. (By Ms. Thornton) Yes.

Q. Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, my next

topic concerns pretrial publicity, and this is

where, as well, too, I want to stress to

everybody here before you give your answer,

this case has received some pre-trial

publicity when the incident occurred and

leading up to the trial. I don't know if

a n y b o d y h a s s e e n a n y t h i n g o n t h e n e w s or h a s

heard anything through community talk or

through any media outlets. If I could give a

reminder here at this point, if you have heard

s o m e t h i n g i n t h e m e d i a a b o u t t h i s c a se , j u s t

let me know. I don't want you to go into any

Iextreme details. I just want you to let me

know if you've heard anything right off the

bat. And then I'm going to explore it .further.

When we talk about the pretrial*

publicity in this c a s e , , o u r basic allegations,the crime occurred April 1, 2006, at the

location of 8 8 4 5 Greenwood Springridge Road,

Highway 169, near Greenwood. The victim in

this case, a gentleman by the name of

Mr. Joe Prock was killed. His mother, victim

Bobbie Prock, was also injured in this

offense. The C a d d o Parish Sheriff's Officeinvestigated this case.

Now, I can't get into any more

specifics other than that, that's the basic

allegations that the law provides us to give

to you in this stage of jury selection.


97/384

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

16

17

18

19

2 0

21

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

27

28

29

3 0

3 1

3 2

Keep in mind, Ms. Snelling, whenever

you see a big case on TV, are you familiar

with the Drew P e t e r s e n case that's going on?A. (By Ms. Snelling) Urn-hum.

Q. With that case, that's a police

officer. He's had several wives missing now.

And he has now been arrested for murder,

right? A lot of pretrial publicity, wouldn't

you agree?

A. (By Ms. Snelling) ( J u r o r nods head.)

Q. In those instances, jurors that aregoing to be selected up there, do you think

they should base their verdict on the pretrial

publicity?

A. ( B y M s . S n e l l i n g ) No.

Q. What should they base the verdict o n?

A. (By Ms. Snelling) The evidence.

Q. The facts and the evidence.

Would you agree with that,

Mr. Walters?

A. (By Mr. W a l t e r s ) Yes.Q. This is what I want to touch up on.

I'll start with you, Mr. Natale. Have youheard any pretrial publicity exposure to this

case?

I A. (By Mr. Natale) I recall the newsaccounts when it first happened, and this past

Sunday night, I read an article on it.

I

Q. F r o m what your understanding of thepretrial publicity is, is it the same basic

allegations that is put up here on our

outline?

55

57 '71-


98/384

I 12

3

~ 4

5

6,

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

A. (By Mr. Natale) Yes.

Q. * With this, have you 'formed any

preconceived notions of the defendant's gu-iltor innocence?

A. ( B y Mr. Natale) No.

Q. I f you w e r e ' s e l e c t e d as a juror inthe case, what would you base your verdict on?

A. (By Mr. Natale) What was presented as

evidence in the trial.

Q. And also i f you were selected a s a

juror, would you be able to exclude anything

you might have heard in the news media

accounts about this case?


Q. And render a decision based strictly

on the facts and evidence in the courtroom?


Q . Ms. Thornton.A. (By Ms. Thornton) I, too. I remember

at that time, but I haven't heard anything

since.

. Q . Okay. Ms. Thornton, I ' l l use this asa comment, have you ever seen a news media

story that turned out to be false down the

road?

A. (By Ms. Thornton) Oh, sure.

Q. They are not in here now, so I can go

ahead and say this without offending anybody,

but is it a fair statement to s a y . t h a t thenews doesn't always get the stories right?

A. (By Ms. Thornton) True.

Q. Would you agree that the news stories

Q Iq

5 6 5 7 7 2


99/384


100/384

5

6I

7

8

9

1 011

1 2

1 3

14

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 6

2 7

2 8

2 9

3 0

3 1

3 2

A .

Q .

A .

Q .

( B y M s . E d w a r d s ) Yes.

You f e e l s t r o n g l y a b o u t t h a t ?

( B y M s . E d w a r d s ) Yes.

M r . O l a g u e , h a v e y o u h a d a n y p r e t r i a l

p u b l i c i t y exposure t o t h i s c a s e ?

A. ( B y M r . O l a g u e ) Yes , q u i t e a b i t .

Q . Q u i t e a b i t .A. ( B y M r . O l a g u e ) ( J u r o r n o d s h e a d . )

Q . I s i t t h e b a s i c a l l e g a t i o n s t h a t I ' v e

o u t l i n e d h e r e ?

A . ( B y M r . O l a g u e ) Y e s .

Q . F r o m w h a t y o u ' v e h e a r d , h a v e y o uf o r m e d a n y p r e c o n c e i v e d n o t i o n s o f t h e

defendant's guilt or innocence?

A. (By Mr. O l a g u e ) No.

Q . I f y o u were s e l e c t e d a s a j u r y i n

t h i s c a s e , w h a t w o u l d y o u , b a s e y o u r d e c i s i o na n d v e r d i c t o n ?

A . ( B y M r . O l a g u e ) O n l y o n t h e f a c t s

p r e s e n t e d a s e v i d e n c e .

Q . T h e f a c t s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n c o u r t ?

A . ( B y M r . O l a g u e ) Yes.

Q . W h a t y o u d i d h e a r o r w h a t y o u w e re

e x p o s e d t o , w o u l d y o u be a b l e t o e x c l u d e t h a t

m e d i a p o r t i o n a n d b a s e y o u r d e c i s i o n s t r i c t l y

o n t h e f a c t s a n d e v i d e n c e ?

A. ( B y M s . E d w a r d s ) I b e l i e v e s o , y e s ,

s i . r .Q . M r . W a l k e r , how a b o u t y o u ?A. ( B y M r . W a l k e r ) I t w o u l d ' b e t h e same.

A nd I m e a n , I ' v e h e a r d a t o u c h o f i t o n t h e

T V . M o s t o f w h a t I h a v e h e a

Date post:	08-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	noel-sheppard
View:	231 times
Download:	0 times

Felton Dorsey

Documents