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

[arkansasmimi]

Chain of Custody
The movement and location of physical evidence from the time it is obtained until the time it is presented in court.

snip>

Court-rendered judgments and jury verdicts that are based on tainted, unreliable, or compromised evidence would undermine the integrity of the entire legal system if such outcomes became commonplace. One way in which the law tries to ensure the integrity of evidence is by requiring proof of the chain of custody by the party who is seeking to introduce a particular piece of evidence.
Proof of a chain of custody is required when the evidence that is sought to be introduced at trial is not unique or where the relevance of the evidence depends on its analysis after seizure. A proper chain of custody requires three types of testimony: (1) testimony that a piece of evidence is what it purports to be (for example, a litigant's blood sample); (2) testimony of continuous possession by each individual who has had possession of the evidence from the time it is seized until the time it is presented in court; and (3) testimony by each person who has had possession that the particular piece of evidence remained in substantially the same condition from the moment one person took possession until the moment that person released the evidence into the custody of another (for example, testimony that the evidence was stored in a secure location where no one but the person in custody had access to it).
Proving chain of custody is necessary to "lay a foundation" for the evidence in question, by showing the absence of alteration, substitution, or change of condition. Specifically, foundation testimony for tangible evidence requires that exhibits be identified as being in substantially the same condition as they were at the time the evidence was seized, and that the exhibit has remained in that condition through an unbroken chain of custody. For example, suppose that in a prosecution for possession of illegal narcotics, police sergeant A recovers drugs from the defendant; A gives police officer B the drugs; B then gives the drugs to police scientist C, who conducts an analysis of the drugs; C gives the drugs to police detective D, who brings the drugs to court. The testimony of A, B, C, and D constitute a "chain of custody" for the drugs, and the prosecution would need to offer testimony by each person in the chain to establish both the condition and identification of the evidence, unless the defendant stipulated as to the chain of custody in order to save time.
.....
Whether the requisite foundation has been laid to establish chain of custody for an exhibit is a matter of discretion on the part of the trial judge. Possibilities of misidentification and adulteration must be eliminated, not absolutely, but as a matter of reasonable probability. Where there is sufficient testimony that the evidence is what it purports to be, and that testimony is offered by each responsible person in the chain of custody, discrepancies as to accuracy or reliability of testimony regarding the chain of custody go to the weight of the evidence and not to its admissibility, meaning that the evidence would be admitted into the record for the judge or jury to evaluate in light of any conflicting testimony that the chain of custody somehow had been compromised. While the party who offers the evidence has the burden of demonstrating the chain of custody, the party against whom the evidence is offered must timely object to the evidence when it is first introduced at trial, or the party will waive any objections as to its integrity based on a compromised chain of custody http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/chain+of+custody

 

[arkansasmimi]

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:

This was when CL was brought from Wrightsville Unit, to Pulaski County Courthouse earlier this month. Curious if that is why she is not speaking with Def Attorney now? *I say now, from the Motion, she hasn't been allowed to meet with them at all. Just thinking out loud, wondering if the latest in regards to evidence being suppressed has anything to do with now having to get a Motion to Compel (Have the Judge make an Order that she has to speak to the Def or her testimony will not be used). How will that effect her Plea Bargain?
***WHEREFORE, Defendant, Arron Lewis, respectfully requests this Court order that
Crystal Lowery speak with defense counsel. If Lowery refuses, then this Court should prevent
her from https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=DERUZCMZ5Q64O4Q4QSE8RQC5HJ1P5I
>>>
A motion to compel asks the court to order either the opposing party or a third party to take some action. This sort of motion most commonly deals with discovery disputes, when a party who has propounded discovery to either the opposing party or a third party believes that the discovery responses are insufficient. The motion to compel is used to ask the court to order the non-complying party to produce the documentation or information requested, and/or to sanction the non-complying party for their failure to comply with the discovery requests. ***

The United States court system is divided into three systems; federal, tribal, and state. The federal courts have their own rules which are stated in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The states, on the other hand, have their own codes of civil and criminal procedure. The federal and state rules are similar, but have occasional differences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_to_compel

 

[arkansasmimi]

Looking back over my notes, JMHO ( http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...RESTS-C-Lowery-guilty&p=12247498#post12247498 )

The new Motions filed 12/28/2015 , have to do with these, and IIRC there were a few matters that still had to be ruled on. *All of this is normal Pretrial procedure stuff in cases JMHO

16. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EMAILS AND TEXT MESSAGES ALLEGEDLY
SENT BY AARON LEWIS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...5M629U2YH6WTE0
12/11 WILL RULE MORNING OF TRIAL

22. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE ANY TESTIMONY BY CRYSTAL LOWERY
CONCERNING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN DEFENDANT AND LOWERY https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...DTUIWL65VLVPE1
12/11 ESSENTIALLY DENIED, BUT RULED STATE INTERPRETATION INCORRECT,

23. NOTICE OF INTENT TO RAISE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...1C3FDMI5E19ZDK
10/6 STATE PUT ON NOTICE

24. FORMAL NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXAMINE STATE’S WITNESSES https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...EP8QKDWPN5I6LY
10/6 STATE PUT ON NOTICE

Defense Motion filed 10/28/2015
1. MOTION FOR DISCLOSURE OF CODEFENDANT STATEMENTS https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...ZDPVZOVMTUVYVD

 

[arkansasmimi]

This new Motion, is ref to #23. In regards to " The defense of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect was raised in an
abundance of caution." that was stated on Record in the OH Hearing Oct 6 iirc. That was the PreTrial/OH on Monday Oct 6 after Def filed the 28 Pretrial Motions the prior Thurs, Oct 1. Judge ruled on some of those Motions and continued the others til the Nov 16th Pretrial. ** Media is making it sound that this Motion is taking back the Prior Motion, (see my ETA>>)its not, its just clarifying the Record where was stated in Court (getting it on the Record, this was first time for this Attorney since took case) and reaffirming the prior Motion #23. JMHO
ETA: Correcting myself, prior to the Oct 6 Hearing :facepalm:
09/16/2015
08:32 AM FILING - OTHER
Entry: FILING WITH ACT 3 **Def filed this 9/16/15 , and at the Oct 6 OH, results were back but Def put it on the Record. SO, it was also in reference to a prior Motion, I was partially incorrect in my comment prior**

09/30/2015
01:49 PM REQUEST
Entry: REQUEST FOR FORENSIC EVALUATION EXTENSION
Images WEB

10/01/2015
08:45 AM LETTER TO COURT
Entry: FROM ASH-EXTENSION FOR FORENSIC EVAL

10/06/2015
11:04 AM ORDER OTHER
Entry: REGARDING REQUESTS & MOTIONS
Images WEB

10/08/2015
10:28 AM REPORT STATE HOSPITAL
Entry: none.
Images No Images

Filed 12/28/2015
NOTICE OF DEFENSE
COMES NOW, Defendant, Arron Lewis, by and through counsel, James Law Firm, and for his
notice of defense, states:
The defense of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect was raised in an
abundance of caution. It has become apparent that Arron Lewis did not suffer from a mental
disease or defect that rendered him unable to understand right from wrong or control himself.
Arron Lewis desires to move forward with the defense of general denial and the affirmative
defense in A.C.A. 5-10-101(b).
WHEREFORE, Defendant, Arron Lewis, respectfully submits this notice of defense.
https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=I88S1MOMWY1ZVQ6F8BPPDSKTS37U3Q

Motion #23 Filed Oct 1, 2015:
NOTICE OF INTENT TO RAISE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
COMES now the Defendant, Aaron Lewis, by and through counsel, the James Law Firm,
and for his Notice of Intent to Raise Affirmative Defense states and alleges as follows:
1. Defendant is charged with capital felony murder.
2. Defendant does intend to raise the affirmative defense as provided in A.C.A. 5-10-101(b)
as a defense to the above-referenced charge in addition to general denial.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ William O. “Bill” James, Jr. https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/i...resent2?DMS_ID=JU6PN44SZ77F1ZRA1C3FDMI5E19ZDK

 

[arkansasmimi]

I Googled Affirmative Defense, and there is one site that listed for brainstorming a partial list of Affirmative Defenses. (was trying to better understand what that meant) that particular site had 149 diff http://www.jeffvail.net/2010/05/affirmative-defenses-litigation.html . Some don't apply in this case no doubt, won't be long til we know what will be used. From that list these look like some to me that may be used: JMHO

- failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted (almost always use)
- statutory defenses prerequisites (these will vary depending on the claims)
- sole negligence of co-defendant
- mistake
- damages were the result of unrelated, pre-existing, or subsequent conditions unrelated to defendant's conduct
- suicide (in accident or some benefits actions)
- unconstitutional (relating to statute allegedly violated)
- permission/invitation (in assault, battery, trespass actions)
- claim of right (defense to element of intent required to prove theft)

 

[arkansasmimi]

JMHO, this is where Affirmative Defense comes in... # 18. MOTION TO CORRECT OR QUASH THE FELONY INFORMATION https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...CDQ81D21MQ63EV
12/11 GRANTED WILL AMEND FELONY INFORMATION

The information -which is read to the jury, the charge, orig left out part of the Statute. The part left out was A.C.A. 5-10-101(b). It was discussed prior up thread.
5-10-101. Capital murder.
(a) A person commits capital murder if: (1) Acting alone or with one (1) or more other persons: (A) The person commits or attempts to commit:
(iii) Kidnapping, 5-11-102;
(B) In the course of and in furtherance of the felony or in immediate flight from the felony, the person or an accomplice causes the death of a person under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life;

MOTION TO CORRECT OR QUASH THE FELONY INFORMATION
COMES NOW, the Defendant, Aaron Lewis, by and through counsel, the James Law
Firm, and for the Defendant’s motion to correct or quash the felony information, states:
1. Defendant is charged with capital felony murder.
2. The capital felony murder statute requires that the offense be committed "under
circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life."
3. Felony information is routinely read to jurors prior the beginning of the case and the
defense does not want the jurors to be under the impression throughout the trial that the
aforementioned is not an element of the offense. To correct this, Defendant would request that
this Court order the amending of the felony information to conform with the requirement of the
law.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant moves this Court to require the State to amend the felony
information or quash the information. https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...CDQ81D21MQ63EV

In the Judges Order, he stated the State will correct that

MOTION TO CORRECT OR QUASH THE FELONY INFORMATION The State has indicated that they will amend the criminal information filed in the case to
add the necessary language: "under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value
of human life." The Motion is hereby granted' https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...K4QX4T3NOPNQ29

Felony Information
Count 1 https://localtvkfsm.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/lewis-and-lowery-felony-charges.pdf

Larry Jegley, Prosecuting Attorney of the Sixth Judicial District of Arkansas, in the name, by the authouity, and on the behalf of the State of Arkansas, charges, AARON M LEWIS AND CRYSTAL HOPE LOWERY with the crime of violating ACA 5-10-101 CAPITAL MURDER committed as follows, to wit. The said defendant(s), in Pulaski County, on or about September 25, 2014 through September 26, 2014, acting alone or with one or more other persons, he committed or attempted to commit a felony, to-wit: Kidnapping, and in the course of and in the furtherance of the felony, or in immediate flight therefrom, he or an accomplice caused the death of Beverly Carter, under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life against the peace and dignity of the State of Arkansas.

*added part prev left out, but unsure if I added it in the right place, thinking I did. under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life

 

[arkansasmimi]

****** This is going to be interesting in the long run.... Now that we have evidence suppressed, JMHO...#3 was for instance thrown out because AL had asked for an Attorney prior to him saying that to the Detectives. And firearms were taken with the illegal search warrants. The firearms charges have been severed from the Capital Murder and Kidnapping and will be dealt with later. Bench warrant info from Mental Eval had stuff from Home and Car search warrants, which now have been deemed illegal and are suppressed. :thinking:

19. MOTION TO DISMISS THE CHARGE OF CAPITAL MURDER WITH THE
UNDERLYING FELONY OF KIDNAPPING https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/im...L0UHCV9AT2WU64
12/11 STATED BOTH SIDES AGREE PREMATURE AT THIS TIME


MOTION TO DISMISS THE CHARGE OF CAPITAL MURDER WITH THE
UNDERLYING FELONY OF KIDNAPPING
COMES NOW, the defendant, Aaron Lewis, by and though his attorneys, the James Law
Firm, and for his motion to dismiss the charge of capital murder, states:
1. The State charged Defendant with one count of capital felony murder with the
underlying felony of kidnapping, as well as kidnapping and possession of firearms by certain
persons.
2. Under the State's theory, kidnapping is an improper underlying felony for the
capital murder charge.
3. The State's theory on the kidnapping is that Beverly Carter was taken for ransom
or reward.
4. The State's theory from the file appears to be that Defendant kidnapped Beverly
Carter and then killed her.
5. To prove felony capital murder, the State would be prevented from demonstrating
that the kidnapping was in furtherance of the homicide; rather, the State would have to prove
homicide somehow furthered the kidnapping, which is illogical with the current set of facts. It
seems absolutely illogical to suggest that one would kill someone to gain a ransom or reward.
6. Arkansas appellate courts have issued multiple decisions holding that a felony
murder charge is improper where the underlying felony was in furtherance of the homicide. See
Allen v. State, 310 Ark. 384, 838 S.W.2d 346 (1992); Sellers v. State, 295 Ark. 489, 749 S.W.2d
669 (1988); Craig v. State, 70 Ark. App. 71, 14 S.W.3d 893 (2000).
7. In Sellers, the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed and remanded the defendant's
conviction for capital felony murder because the burglary was committed to facilitate the
homicide, not the other way around. Sellers, supra.
8. In Allen, the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed and remanded the defendant's
conviction for first degree felony murder.
The proof showed that appellant fired a pistol when he killed the victim. At trial,
the State contended that firing the pistol constituted the underlying felony of
aggravated assault, and on that basis the trial court gave the felony-murder
instruction. That was a misconstruction of the felony-murder statute. Under the
first degree felony-murder statute, "a person commits murder in the first degree if
. . . he commits . . . a felony, and in the course of and in the furtherance of the
felony . . . causes the death of any person . . . ." Ark. Code Ann. 5-10-102 (Supp.
1991). The assault in this case was only in the furtherance of the murder, not of
some other felony. . . . In sum, under the proof, the appellant would not be guilty
of felony-murder even if he were so charged.
Craig v. State, 70 Ark. App. 71, 80 (Ark. Ct. App. 2000) (quoting Allen, 310 Ark. at 388,
838 S.W.2d at 348).
9. While Allen involved an aggravated assault, we similarly here have an alleged
kidnapping, both of which culminated in death. Similar to the Supreme Court in Allen, this
Court should hold that the State may not convict Lewis of capital felony murder with the
underlying felony being kidnapping because it is logically impossible that the murder of Carter
would have facilitated a ransom or reward.
WHEREFORE, the defendant moves this Court to dismiss the charge of felony capital
murder with the underlying felony of kidnapping.
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ William O. “Bill” James, Jr

 

[arkansasmimi]

5-11-102. Kidnapping.

(a) A person commits the offense of kidnapping if, without consent, the person restrains another person so as to interfere substantially with the other person's liberty with the purpose of:

(1) Holding the other person for:

(A) Ransom or reward; or

(B) Any other act to be performed or not performed for the other person's return or release;

(2) Using the other person as a shield or hostage;

(3) Facilitating the commission of any felony or flight after the felony;

(4) Inflicting physical injury upon the other person;

(5) Engaging in sexual intercourse, deviate sexual activity, or sexual contact with the other person;

(6) Terrorizing the other person or another person; or

(7) Interfering with the performance of any governmental or political function.

(b) (1) Kidnapping is a Class Y felony.

(2) However, kidnapping is a Class B felony if the defendant shows by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she or an accomplice voluntarily released the person restrained alive and in a safe place prior to trial.

Kidnapping Bench Warrant was issued on Sunday Sept 28, 2014, prior to Beverly Carter being located and the whereabout of AL known. Arrest on Kidnapping was on Monday Sept 29, prior to his booking early morning Tues Sept 30.
using per info from Medical Eval, evidence from Search Warrants of Home and Ford Fusion. Testimony Nov 16 was that they didnt have evidence on Sept 28, 2014 that BC was anything but missing at the time.

**:thinking: Hope I am very wrong in my thoughts of what this looks like to me. Hope we get better reporting today from media.

 

[jstkiddn]

Anyone have the names of the local reporters that have been live tweeting from the courtroom?

 

[mpnola]

http://www.housingwire.com/articles...d-murderer-changes-plea-wants-evidence-tossed

In some of those interviews, which were presented as part of pre-trial proceedings and recapped in detail on Arkansas Online, Lewis selected Carter from an Internet ad, based on the fact that she worked alone.

Upon meeting Carter at a house under the guise of being a potential buyer, Lewis allegedly told Carter "You're about to have a very bad day," before subduing her and binding her with green duct tape.

During questioning, Lewis repeatedly told detectives time was running out for the kidnapped Realtor.

"Are you guaranteeing me this woman's alive?" asked sheriff’s Investigator Jeff Allison, according to the now-inadmissible interview transcripts.

"Depending on how long it takes," Lewis said. "How long can a person survive without food and water since yesterday? You'll figure it out."

 

[Mindmatters]

I will be so very glad when I no longer have to see AL's ugly mug coming across my FB feed in news stories. There is an overload on my feed right now. I can only imagine how the poor Carter family must feel.

Totally and completely off the current topic, but I'm even annoyed at the singer Aaron Lewis' billboards I've seen in both Fayetteville and Little Rock! I saw one at the I-630/University interchange a couple of weeks ago and about ran off the road because it took a second for two for it to register in my brain that it was a different AL and he was just a singer trying to advertise a concert. Still, my first thought was "Geesh...I hope the Carter's don't have to drive by these stupid signs on a regular basis."

BBM--Jstkiddn, I absolutely know how you feel. After reading everything he said in the FB post, which a poster here was so very kind and sweet enough to send to me :heartluv: (I'm not on FB), I find that he is such an evil, revolting piece of $hit that really, really deserves to die for his crimes.

In many ways I dread the upcoming trial because I am convinced beyond any doubt that Beverly's killer will do exactly what that killer who brutally murdered Travis Alexander did--continue murdering her over and over again with twisted filthy lies. :sick:

 

[Raptorider]

Carl Jr just posted that the hearing is over. Back again on Tuesday.

 

[arkansasmimi]

State had the hearing today. They wanted to supplement their motion trying to get the car search admitted. Judge will have his ruling and other housekeeping next week Jan 5.

Called 3 witnesses, recalled Sgt Mike Blain who said he gave the order to tow AL car. He didn't do any reports from or about the accident.
Shane Hastings said he called the tow company even though Clay Almond the officer who did the accident report wrote that it was owners request. Sgt Blain came up on wreck and ordered it towed.

David Harris from crime lab told about looking into the trunk. Was asked if he knew what color hair BC had said yes blond. Other hairs were found per pros but not able to connect to BC.

2 pieces of tape were found in trunk but not roll like we thought prior.

AL took stand and was asked if he was given opportunity to get car towed or moved prior to his phone being taken. He said he was texting CL from the accident . CL was at the Post Office down street a little ways down said she couldn't get past cop cars and she followed the ambulance to hospital.

Most everything that was said was in the pros motion prior. They asked if the search still out if can use pictures taken

Def said that this first time ever that he has seen where a hair was written on an inventory report.

 

[arkansasmimi]

All the witnesses said that the car was towed because was evidence or potential evidence and Def argued that was illegal. Def argued that it was against PCSO policy not to allow an owner to have towed. I will be surprised if judge changes mind jmho.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Jury selection will be in Judge Wright courtroom but he is going to check with other Judges to see if can use a larger courtroom for trial.

 

[arkansasmimi]

http://www.housingwire.com/articles...d-murderer-changes-plea-wants-evidence-tossed

In some of those interviews, which were presented as part of pre-trial proceedings and recapped in detail on Arkansas Online, Lewis selected Carter from an Internet ad, based on the fact that she worked alone.

Upon meeting Carter at a house under the guise of being a potential buyer, Lewis allegedly told Carter "You're about to have a very bad day," before subduing her and binding her with green duct tape.

During questioning, Lewis repeatedly told detectives time was running out for the kidnapped Realtor.

"Are you guaranteeing me this woman's alive?" asked sheriff’s Investigator Jeff Allison, according to the now-inadmissible interview transcripts.

"Depending on how long it takes," Lewis said. "How long can a person survive without food and water since yesterday? You'll figure it out."

Sadly all that got suppressed all that remains was not recorded. So jury will not hear that.

 

[jstkiddn]

http://www.housingwire.com/articles...d-murderer-changes-plea-wants-evidence-tossed

In some of those interviews, which were presented as part of pre-trial proceedings and recapped in detail on Arkansas Online, Lewis selected Carter from an Internet ad, based on the fact that she worked alone.

Upon meeting Carter at a house under the guise of being a potential buyer, Lewis allegedly told Carter "You're about to have a very bad day," before subduing her and binding her with green duct tape.

During questioning, Lewis repeatedly told detectives time was running out for the kidnapped Realtor.

"Are you guaranteeing me this woman's alive?" asked sheriff’s Investigator Jeff Allison, according to the now-inadmissible interview transcripts.

"Depending on how long it takes," Lewis said. "How long can a person survive without food and water since yesterday? You'll figure it out."

Sadly all that got suppressed all that remains was not recorded. So jury will not hear that.

BBM. UGH! That really makes me sick to know they won't be able to hear or know what kind of head games this monster was playing. Really, really just makes me ill.

 

[jstkiddn]

Arkansasmimi...glad you were able to attend! So, was anything discussed about the defense interviewing CL? What about the affidavit? Anything on that?

 

[jstkiddn]

Carl Jr just posted that the hearing is over. Back again on Tuesday.

This one was public, so I could see it. He also said:

I didn't lunge at Arron, with his stupid hair & stupid face & stupid smug grin & stupid responses, so I'm going to call today a win.

OMG....bless his heart! But man, what a spot on description. That's the same way I would describe everything about him. Just stupid, stupid, stupid!

It has to be SO FREAKIN' HARD to sit there and look at his stupid smug face and *not* just get up and jump on him!! I cannot imagine. If CC or anyone that knows him happens to be reading here, I would love for him to know that I'm sending a virtual hug and while I can so totally see why he would want to try to strangle him with his bare hands, I'm glad he didn't. I would hate for that idiot (AL) to be given the opportunity to file even more lawsuits and make the circus bigger than he's already managed to do.

I'm pretty sure his mama would be proud of how he's handled himself so far.

 

[jstkiddn]

Link to interview with CC, Jr. following today's hearing:

http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2015/12/30/beverly-carters-son-reacts-to-evidence-hearing-its-really-pretty-gut-wrenching/78089470/