GUILTY AR - Beverly Carter, 49, Little Rock, 25 Sep 2014 - #11

[arkansasmimi]

JMHO: So far as of the 12/11/2015 Judges orders: MOTIONS 15-28 and other Motions after :lookingitup:

Def Motions filed 10/1/2015
15. MOTION TO RETURN CELL PHONE SEIZED FROM DEFENDANT https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=1N44WHCMA8AE6QY3S56XFAPM33O2OD
12/11 DENIED

16. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EMAILS AND TEXT MESSAGES ALLEGEDLY
SENT BY AARON LEWIS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=Y46PU5XETMC9UGSC5M629U2YH6WTE0
12/11 WILL RULE MORNING OF TRIAL

17. MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE BASED ON OVERREACHING USE OF
PROSECUTOR'S SUBPOENA POWER https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=CWJ8CZB48F5OHJQ63MRK6S1GAG6DAM
12/11 DENIED

18. MOTION TO CORRECT OR QUASH THE FELONY INFORMATION https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=X5UN2RTW5F9TQ2QHCDQ81D21MQ63EV
12/11 GRANTED WILL AMEND FELONY INFORMATION

19. MOTION TO DISMISS THE CHARGE OF CAPITAL MURDER WITH THE
UNDERLYING FELONY OF KIDNAPPING https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=AKVW7SAAE8USBQIHL0UHCV9AT2WU64
12/11 STATED BOTH SIDES AGREE PREMATURE AT THIS TIME

20. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY ABOUT CEMENT DUST
PURSUANT TO DAUBERT V. MERRELL DOW PHARMACEUTICALS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=0888IQC2PKO2IE4BHOXRIEVUBS01FK
12/11 GRANTED

21. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY ABOUT TOWER PINGS
PURSUANT TO DAUBERT V. MERRELL DOW PHARMACEUTICALS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=TMKKU14GJ10LK55A35GN7O19X0SQR9
12/11 GRANTED

22. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY TESTIMONY BY CRYSTAL LOWERY
CONCERNING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN DEFENDANT AND LOWERY https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=XIXJDH5IUIQ9N0HTDTUIWL65VLVPE1
12/11 ESSENTIALLY DENIED, BUT RULED STATE INTERPRETATION INCORRECT,

23. NOTICE OF INTENT TO RAISE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=JU6PN44SZ77F1ZRA1C3FDMI5E19ZDK
10/6 STATE PUT ON NOTICE

24. FORMAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXAMINE STATE’S WITNESSES https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=6Z3E1J47GFFO3IA7EP8QKDWPN5I6LY
10/6 STATE PUT ON NOTICE

25. DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY OF RULE 404(b) EVIDENCE
(Request for Prior Bad Acts) https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=SHCFFKBS0Z4A2O5GWYXSXILK7P0JZP
10/6 GRANTED

26. DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE OF CRIMINAL HISTORY OF
POTENTIAL JURORS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=FVGQ262T4OQILNZ2ZW701N4BWIWMQ2
10/6 GRANTED

27. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE OF STATEMENTS AND HEARING ON THE
ADMISSIBILITY OF STATEMENTS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=3RDHAE4THEWNSSK03HT4FP86KQ9QK0
10/6 GRANTED

28. MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=UI70SV2ANQEJ8QMCFDDC60AWRXINH7
10/6 GRANTED

Defense Motion filed 10/28/2015
1. MOTION FOR DISCLOSURE OF CODEFENDANT STATEMENTS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=I2GFT407BKWR5GDSZDPVZOVMTUVYVD

State Motion 12/11/2015
MOTION TO CONSIDER INVENTORY SEARCH OF THE FORD FUSION https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=96CVC43Z1X2YHF5OO0P1H33RQDQ7BZ

Def Response to State Motion to Consider Inventory Search of Ford Fusion 12/16
https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=AEF9VSZYGHBGLKCGUGG1R3NYZJ0Z20

12/16 JUDGE DENIED STATE ORDER TO CONSIDER INVENTORY SEARCH
https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=OI0ZJPAK4KJ78V2ECKQ30FV3PEB1EP

 

[arkansasmimi]

Cross posted to the No Discussion thread . (going over these motions and rulings is what brought my attention to stuff posted up thread) jmho.

 

[arkansasmimi]

TN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COLTNTY, ARKANSAS
FOURTH DIVISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS
VS.
ARRON LEWIS
PLAINTIFF
cP.20t4-3928
DEFENDANT
ORDER
Comes now for consideration the State's Motion to Consider Inventory Search of the
Ford Fusion, and based upon a review of the case file, the pleadings of both parties, the
testimony and evidence presented at the omnibus hearing held November 16, 2015, and all other
matters considered, the Court DOTH FIND:
The Defendant is charged with capital murder, kidnapping, and possession of firearms by
certain persons. A j"ry trial on the first two counts is currently set for January 12,2016.T\e
Court has now disposed of or deferred various Motions filed by the Defendant by its Orders
entered October 6,2015 and December 9,2015. The State filed a Motion on December l l, 2015
in response to the most recent Order. In that Order, the Court found that the Pulaski County
Sheriff s Department's search of the Defendant's vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment and
suppressed the evidence obtained as a result of that search. The State requests that the Court
consider admitting the evidence found in the vehicle pursuant to the "inevitable discovery"
exception to the general rule regarding suppression of illegally obtained evidence.
That exception recognizes that "if the government can prove that the evidence would
have been obtained inevitably and, therefore, would have been admitted regardless of any
overreaching by the police, there is no rational basis to keep that evidence from the jury in order
to ensure the faimess of the trial proceedings." Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431,447 (198a). The
State cites fiuther the proposition that "police offrcers may conduct a warrantless inventory

 

[arkansasmimi]

search of a vehicle that is being impounded in order to protect the owner's property while it is in
the custody of the police, to insure against claims of lost, stolen or vandalized property and to
guard the police from danger." @,-.lstate,342 Ark.684, 688 (2000). The Arkansas Rules
of Criminal Procedure provide that "[a] vehicle impounded in consequence of an arrest, or
retained in official custody for other good cause, may be searched at such times and to such
extent as is reasonably necessary for safekeeping of the vehicle and its contents." Ark- R. Crim.
Pro. 12.6(b). The State also recites the PCSO's inventory search policy, which directs the
Sheriffs to remark on items of significant value and itemize damage other than normal wear.
The State's Motion makes various assertions - that "[p]ursuant to PCSO's written policy
regarding towed vehicles, an inventory search of the vehicle was initiated at the crash site[,]" that
"[a] vehicle storage report was filled out at 10:15 a.m. on9l28ll4 describing items that were
found in the passenger compartment of the Ford Fusion at the crash site[,]" and that "[t]he trunk
was not inventoried at the crash site because it was believed the trunk should be opened in a
controlled environment. Therefore the inventory search was suspended until the vehicle was
towed to the PCSO crime scene bay."
These assertions appear only in the State's motion and are supported by none of the
evidence or testimony before the Court. The vehicle storage report relied upon by the State has
not been introduced. Investigator Jordan Ables of the PCSO, when testiffing at the omnibus
hearing, stated that that the vehicle was searched by the investigators with the assistance of
Arkansas Crime Lab technicians pursuant to Judge Gruber's search wa:rant after "t was towed
from the accident scene . . . to our crime scene bay [where it had been] locked and secured." [at
87] He does not mention any inventory search or any intent to complete an inventory search prior
to or subsequent to the illegal search.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Ables testified that, pursuant to the search warrant, the investigators found green duct
tape, white rope, nine millimeter shells in a white bag, asoftball bat, a Fuji Camer4 and an IBM
laptop.l [at 83] The investigators also removed the left corner of a passenger seat cover and the
left corner of the actual passenger seat and completed "tape lifts," resulting in "fiber, hair, trash,
foreign object" evidence.2
The State argues that the alleged inventory search that had already begun "would have
been completed at the crime scene bay pursuant to the authority cited by this Court in Benson.
The inventory search was intemrpted by the search pursuant to the flawed search warrant'"
Again, none of this evidence appears anywhere in the record but for the assertions in the State's
Motion. The testimony at omnibus indicated that the vehicle was locked and secured at the
pCSO prior to execution of the illegal warrant. The Court is not convinced that an inventory
search had begun or would have been completed simply because the Rules of Criminal
Procedure and the PCSO's policy would have allowed one'
The burden of proof under the inevitable discovery doctrine lies with the government to
show that the evidence would have inevitably been discovered absent the intervening illegality.
See general/y Nix, supra. Here, the State has not done so. Nix anticipates that the government
.,must bear the risk of error in the determination made necessary by its constitutional violation."3
The Court does not believe, even if it were to accept the State's timeline, that tape lifts and
removal of the passenger seat and seat cover would have been reasonably necessary for the
I The green duct tape does not appear in the itemized list on the warrant retum. State's Ex. 2. The
State i'as previously indicated that it did not intend to use the Fuji Camera and IBM laptop.
Motions io Suppress the laptop and camera were granted by this Court in a previous Order with
no objection from the State.
2 There was apparently hair and blood evidence discovered from the seat and tape lifts.
3 Nix, supra, at 456-457 (U.S. Supreme Court found that the government overcame mere
"speculation" as to what would have been discovered by offering proof to resolve the
uncertai

 

[arkansasmimi]

*U."rrry of the vehicle and its contents. Nor does the Court believe that the items now sought
to be introduced would have conceivably been listed in an inventory report as "items of
significant value."
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that "an inventory search must not be a ruse
forageneralrummaginginordertodiscoverincriminatingevidence.',@,
517 U.S. 806 (1996) (citing Florida v. Wells,495 U.S. 1,4 (1990)). Investigator Ables testified
that the vehicle was towed to the PCSO so as to complete the inventory search in a controlled
environment, but once the vehicle had been towed to the PCSO facility where Ables testified that
it was "locked and secured," the governmental interest in protecting the contents of the vehicle
from unauthorized interference was no longer present. See Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.5.367
The Court's Order stated in clear language that the State would be given the opportunity
to show that the items in question were seized during an inventory search and not during the
search pursuant to the illegal warrant. The State has instead argued that the items illegally
obtained would eventually have been found based on a theoretical inventory search that no
evidence or testimony indicates would have been completed or supported by law. The State's
Motion is therefore denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
HERBERT T. WRIGHT, JR. _

 

[arkansasmimi]

:tantrum: :banghead: :judge:

Quick list of Evidence LOST now!
From Car:
green duct tape
white rope
nine millimeter shells in a white bag
a softball bat
a Fuji Camera *state said didnt intend to use
IBM laptop. * state said didnt intend to use
"tape lifts," resulting in "fiber, hair, trash, foreign object" evidence
There was apparently hair and blood evidence discovered from the seat and tape lifts

From House:
Beverly Carter iPhone *that per testimony at hearing had fingerprints on it
*after re reading, I am unsure if the jewelry was actually Beverly Carters the way the documents read. It was stated that Inv did not know if it was Beverly Carter jewelry when took by the illegal warrant.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Crystal Lowery has been played on OUT TO COURT STATUS.
Rec'd call 840pm 12/16/2015

OH!!To be a fly on the wall :thinking:

NAME: LOWERY,CRYSTAL
ADDRESS: 165 RANDALL DR
CITY: JACKSONVILLE
STATE / ZIP: AR
AGE: 42
RACE: WHITE
S.O. NUMBER: 194189
BOOKING DATE: 12/16/2015

DAYS INCARCERATED: 0

BOOKING TIME: 08:32pm


Charge Bond Amount Arrest Agency Court Disposition
PEN RETURNEE 0.00 PCSO 4TH DIVISION CIRCUIT COURT NO BOND // MUST RETURN TO MCPHERSON UNIT http://pcso.org/InmateRoster.shtml

 

[becciboo81]

I tried but.. Can someone summarize that to someone who had a long day and can't think clearly?? Is all the evidence thrown out basically??

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[concernedmother]

Hopefully his fingerprints are on the duct tape placed on BC.There may be fibers from AL on her also. Since this was about searching illegally, I dont think this will affect whatever they have against CL so that she can back out on her offer and ask for a trial. jmo.

 

[arkansasmimi]

I tried but.. Can someone summarize that to someone who had a long day and can't think clearly?? Is all the evidence thrown out basically??

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Still trying to figure out myself lol. But for sure, All the recorded confessions/interview at CID office is OUT, All the evidence from the Search Warrants from AL Ford Fusion and CL/AL home on Randall Drive, Jacksonville AR. IS OUT.

Have the victim recording IN, anything at crime scene is still IN as far as I can see, Phone records are in but they gonna have to prove/authenticate the text and emails and gonna rule on that morning of trial. Thats my grasp on it so far. Moving kinda fast at this stage. JMHO

 

[arkansasmimi]

I just thought of something as I was taking my grandsons to school and passed a dark colored SUV... From Testimony, at hearing, JMHO it seems that LEO didnt know WHO AL was prior to the wreck. Testimony was that they had house under survillence because of the phone records of number BC had been speaking with, which came back to CL because phone was listed to her. CL address if looked on Assessors online page at time showed that CL had an SUV, which VI#1 said was a dark brown color iirc. Eyewitness from what we are told said a dark colored car with slender white male. From what we were also told by VI#1 NJ, CL was not at home on Sunday (when they started surveillance of the home per media report they started on Sunday Sept 28 like 7am? iirc So only veh home would be AL black Ford Fusion. Slender white male gets into dark color car (makes sense) has wreck, has phone that has phone number that connects to the same number they know of coming back to CL (makes sense). Lt Swagerty the one who took the phone from AL, couldnt say if he knew the phone was listed to CL or not. Inv Ables admitted that he couldnt say 100% that they had evidence of an Abduction (at that time Sept 28th). Have to go back and look at my notes but one of the Inv even said on the stand that the car was listed to CL and driven by AL. (not true by Assessors records, that veh came back to AL name, which whomever name on title is who its tags are in) It may still be up on Assessors page for AL but CL info gone as per VI#1 CL car was returned to whomever she was buying from after she was arrested. AL was still up. I have ss of them both though.

To me thats why they didnt arrest AL when he had wreck, all they seemed to have was CL info. They had her as a suspect from get go. They worked hard on her arrest stuff and arrested her a month later and ended up with a conviction by way of plea bargain. She knows she was guilty or she wouldnt have plead. But hindsight one would think they also could use the stuff from Search of home against her too. But that has been deemed illegal search. What else did they have against CL? Car wasnt in her name or she wasnt in it when AL wrecked so unless CL prints, dna or whatever was in car, but that evidence is out now too. JMHO it would leave stuff from crime scene and email and text messages. Can anyone think of anything else? Again those have to be authenticated and will be on morning of trial. They are gonna have to use CL testimony (JMHO) for the most part to do that. But what if she hadn't did a plea?

When they got the info from AL car (tags registration so forth) they knew then (again JMHO) who AL was and of his priors. That on top of what they found with the now deemed illegal search warrants, they filed for Kidnapping warrant on AL. But why not on CL? Because of the car and house contents found. JMHO. With the info they had, and the slender male (from eyewitness) that where they got AL and other built on CL. That also why they probably said it was Random. But I don't believe and haven't since I started following this case and coming here and saw the whole thing about the cheer gym. I just wish (again hindsight) wish they had taken more time. JMHO
ETA: have to go back and look to see, but the Arrest Documents we see were from when they wrote out to file the Formal Charges in Nov. I wonder what the orig said, when they arrested AL on having the guns orig. They knew then Sept 28 that he had the priors. HAD They known AL was on probation they could possibly gotten a warrant to arrest and hold at wreck site or hospital. Again just thinking out loud after seeing a dark suv and got to thinking. JMHO

 

[arkansasmimi]

Hopefully his fingerprints are on the duct tape placed on BC.There may be fibers from AL on her also. Since this was about searching illegally, I dont think this will affect whatever they have against CL so that she can back out on her offer and ask for a trial. jmo.

Agree. And I been thinking about CL, if she were to renig on her plea, per the Pros her deal was a contract if she doesnt fulfill her end off the table and they take her to trial. So say hypothetically she renigs, and goes do the same search warrants deemed illegal get thrown out on her too? (would think so) CL would def be on the house, on the car, only if something connecting CL to evidence in car. JMHO. BUT I wonder if the State could bring up the fact that she had plea and renig on it? And all the media coverage about her plea, she gonna have hard time getting a jury that doesnt know about or possible made opinion. They gonna have to find jury for AL that can put their opinions aside and that gonna go thru alot of people JMHO. Saying this because of all the comments and likes on comments on social media. High Profile case. JMO, I hope the evidence they left with is strong on its own.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Darn it I got tons of stuff to do today but my thoughts are racing right now lol

First, JMHO, I think the TBR charge for CL was BC phone because they KNEW for sure that it was BC phone that was found on the dresser in the master bedroom because one of the Inv testified that he or someone called and had it verified "the IME I # from back of iPhone was that of Beverly Carter iPhone" this was testified by Inv Zachary Warren. I don't think the jewelry was BC either after re reading over documents other night trying to figure out what was ruled on or not. IF was BC jewelry JMHO we would have seen some sort of Motion regarding it. ***ETA Now, since it wasnt CL stuff they were going over, it wasnt testified if they had any possible touch dna from nasty panties that the phone may have been on as VI#1 spoke about. Only that the phone was found on top of dresser in master bedroom :silly:

**Side note, :thinking: so far anyways I can say who is who from documents of all the Subpoenas so far. SO Far the only place in the docket that the Inv Zachary Warren appears is in something that was placed under seal given to the Judge and deemed not Brady material>> Nor do I see Lt Mark Swagerty name subpoena yet(who got the silver iPhone from AL at the accident *also not it was his office they went to and did the secret recordings and where AL played the recording from his phone to Det Allison and Inv Drew Evans * Inv Drew Evans is who IIRC did the Affidavit for Kidnapping Bench Warrant 9/28) he testified, as did Lead Det (from the Missing Person Report) and no Subpoena yet on docket for him. .
11/18/2015
04:52 PM ORDER OTHER
Entry: MATERIALS WILL REMAIN UNDER SEAL & IN CUSTODY OF COURT REPORTER
Images WEB https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=JXEIVSSEU809OYF01ZQ2C75HZGPF7G

ORDER
Comes now before the Court the matter of discoverability of potential Brady material in
this case, and based on a review of the materials, the court Doth FIND.
The State has submitted certain materials under seal to this Court for an in-camera
evaluation. This Court finds that the submitted materials regarding Investigator Zachary Warren
of the Pulaski County Sheriffs Office are not "material either to guilt or to punishment" and
that as such, they are not subject to disclosure under the due process standard set by the United
States Supreme Court in Brady v. Mar.vland,373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194 (1963). The materials
will remain under seal and in the custody of this Court's reporter.
IT IS SO ORDERED . ..\ I
l/ t? t(
HERBERT T. WRIGHT, JR. - CIRCUIT ruDGE

 

[arkansasmimi]

Hopefully his fingerprints are on the duct tape placed on BC.There may be fibers from AL on her also. Since this was about searching illegally, I dont think this will affect whatever they have against CL so that she can back out on her offer and ask for a trial. jmo.

Right about now or sometime this morning she would be finding out the stuff that dismissed on AL case.

Unless she does renig we may never know if they did have TOUCH DNA FROM BC PHONE BEING ON HER NASTY PANTIES ON DRESSER! :websleuther::noooo::laughcry: ok sorry couldnt resist that :naughty: :hiding:

:waiting: From something in media IIRC she is still represented by her same Public Defender. Guess that would make sense being that she isnt really in the clear until after she fulfills her plea bargain. :judge:

 

[Zuri]

Thank you Arkansasmimi for posting all of these Motions and Decisions. My heart aches for the Carter family in view of all the evidence that has been tossed out. I am not understanding why the warrants were so vague. Surely this was not the first time the LEO had written a warrant?

In your opinion, was this bad police work on the part of one LEO? And how does the State clean up this mess? It seems as though the State has an uphill battle and AL has some very good lawyers. I just hope he doesn't walk because on this mistake.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Thank you Arkansasmimi for posting all of these Motions and Decisions. My heart aches for the Carter family in view of all the evidence that has been tossed out. I am not understanding why the warrants were so vague. Surely this was not the first time the LEO had written a warrant?

In your opinion, was this bad police work on the part of one LEO? And how does the State clean up this mess? It seems as though the State has an uphill battle and AL has some very good lawyers. I just hope he doesn't walk because on this mistake.

Your welcome. All of them are online public records. And I agree about the heartaching for the family and loved ones of Beverly.

As far as my opinion, it does not matter to anyone but me. I am just following a criminal case. But I am a LEO Advocate and hold them in high regards for all that they do and have to see to keep the citizens safe.
All I know is that each Inv, Det, Lt, FBI so forth all LEO were asked how long they have been and or their current job. 2 of the Investigators are now with the AR Attorney Generals Office (one 6/7 months and the other said he was 7 months) As Special Agents. (Drew Evans and Michael Hendrix). SO surely they had done Affidavits and Search Warrants multiple times. The FBI SA he iirc 18 yrs. yet he only wrote a small report.

I believe they were trying to find Beverly Carter because she was reported missing. I also remember that at the time Casey Compton was missing as was Baby Malik Drummond. You can go back and look there was an out cry of anger by many about so much attention getting placed on this missing person vs others. I figured that they must have had strong evidence that she was kidnapped like a call (still cant rule that out because we dont know all they do have) but I not sure about some of my orig thoughts vs what we see at this point. JMHO

But we can be hopeful that they have lots of evidence from the crime scene where remains were found. Possible DNA under fingernails? On tape that used to bind BC, anything used to possibly dig hole or cover up. shoe tracks, hair from either AL or CL. (AL head was shaved but body hair on arms and so forth possible) saliva on tape tearing it? Any prints on the gate opening and closing it. Anything in the dumptruck. (gps, any fibers tire tracks so forth)

The state said they dont intend to use Cell Tower pings so thats out. But they may have gps from the iPhones. ** I did learn something new from testimony, I old school cell phone not smart phone. But even though the Sims card was out of the iPhone, could use wifi if had it. <<Per Inv Drew Evans under cross by Def Attorney Bill James.

** When Def Attorney was cross Det Allison about AL waiving his Rights /if the Det thought he did, Det Allison testified that AL refused to sign the Miranda for and said a lawyer or a room without a recorder (was in interview room with live feed) Def Attorney said asked was this his desire to swoop over.. Det Allison said "no that this was a very valuable case"
and another time, actually few times that their goal was to locate Beverly Carter. I have no doubt that that was their goal. And in the end, I am thankful that they were able to do that and so quickly. Some families never do.

But in all this, we now have hindsight of things. they were in the moment and what was going one. So I dont know or understand why they did or didnt do at the time. At the press conference they spoke about having tons of calls to tip line and interviewing people. Also I wonder if it was ever determined if AL was pulled out and when by that one guy who said he pulled him out he thought was Friday (sept 26). So much we still DONT know. JMHO

 

[arkansasmimi]

There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (2 members and 15 guests):lurk:
Maybe others will log on and chime in. Be back later have some things to do and errands to run. :seeya:

 

[Zuri]

Thanks again. I value your insight as you have followed this case so closely. Unfortunately it seems the perps get all the benefit of doubt where BC got none. I understand LE was frantic to find her and time was of the essence. In a case like this, everything has to be done by the book so it is wrapped up with a bow when handed to the prosecutor.

I am a LE advocate myself and as a homicide survivor, I am eternally grateful the detectives did such an outstanding job. I don't know if I could have handled a lot of the evidence being thrown out against the men that killed my brother. Fortunately, it didn't happen.

I just don't want that AL getting off on technicalities or CL either. What they did was so cruel and horrific to Beverley and her family. I really hope justice will be served and if for nothing else, the LEO learned a very valuable lesson.

 

[KayKay.85]

http://www.thv11.com/story/news/loc...inadmissible-in-realtor-murder-case/77482186/

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - A Pulaski County judge has ruled that evidence found in the car of a man charged in the death of a central Arkansas real estate agent cannot be introduced at trial.


Circuit Court Judge Herbert Wright said in a ruling late Wednesday that the evidence taken from Arron Lewis' car was obtained using an overly broad search warrant, not during an inventory of items when the car was impounded. Lewis is charged with kidnapping and capital murder in the 2014 killing of Beverly Carter.