Found Deceased GA - William Deshawn Hamilton, 6, 1999, unidentified for 23 years, his mother Teresa Black charged.

  • #21
The prosecution is asking Thomas questions about the condition of William's body. He says parts were detached. William's skull was located on the left side while his body was further right. Again Thomas shows emotion when answering these questions.

 
  • #22
The defense questions Thomas Gasque
Just a reminder that Thomas Gasque was one of the first responding officers at the scene responding to a call of a body found in the woods.

The defense asks whether the body was buried or if there were any obstructions trying to hide the body, Thomas says "No, he was lying there in the open". He asks Thomas to clarify the distance between William's skull and his body, Thomas agrees it was likely around 7ft apart.The defense asks no further questions.

 
  • #23
Quite an important note
At some point after this, Ava saw William's Father. Teresa claimed she moved to Atlanta with William to stay with William's father's parents. Ava asked him about William, he responded that he was not staying with them. Ava reported her concerns to the police, who attended her residence. She requested that they force Teresa to tell them where William was. They responded that their hands were tied and had no probable cause to work on. Ava then called every hospital in South Carolina, she was very concerned and did not know what else to do.

Their hands were tied? No probable cause? A mother returns without her child. The child's father disputes her story of she and William living with his parents. That's probable cause. This makes me so mad. Police couldn't have saved him but they might have found him sooner if they had interrogated her & demanded she produce her child. The cases involving Caley Anthony & Tylee & JJ should give police enough reason to be suspicious of any parent who won't divulge where their child is.
 
  • #24
Their hands were tied? No probable cause? A mother returns without her child. The child's father disputes her story of she and William living with his parents. That's probable cause. This makes me so mad. Police couldn't have saved him but they might have found him sooner if they had interrogated her & demanded she produce her child. The cases involving Caley Anthony & Tylee & JJ should give police enough reason to be suspicious of any parent who won't divulge where their child is.
Agreed, it's dreadful. Ava also said she rang the police often every week after that to try to locate William, yet they did absolutely nothing.
 
  • #25
Their hands were tied? No probable cause? A mother returns without her child. The child's father disputes her story of she and William living with his parents. That's probable cause. This makes me so mad. Police couldn't have saved him but they might have found him sooner if they had interrogated her & demanded she produce her child. The cases involving Caley Anthony & Tylee & JJ should give police enough reason to be suspicious of any parent who won't divulge where their child is.
I just want to say a big thank you for joining me here, the case has struck a nerve with me after William did not have so much as his own name for 23 years. I feel it is important to follow and document as much as I can out of respect for him.
 
  • #26
it seems if someone had just listened to Ava...
 
  • #27
it seems if someone had just listened to Ava...
Exactly, especially as she was so persistent! Thanks for joining us here, I appreciate it for William.
 
  • #28
Next witness up, the state calls Chris Harvey, a former DeKalb County Homicide Detective
Chris is led by the prosecution in stating the procedures of securing a scene when a body is found and the different agencies involved in doing so. The prosecution is showing video footage of the scene, including William's body and the surrounding area. Chris confirms that the video footage accurately depicts the scene he witnessed.

 
  • #29
“This is not the first death Black is linked to, as North Carolina court records show she was convicted of manslaughter in 1994.”

 
  • #30
The prosecution asks Chris whether there was much activity near where William's body was found. In terms of people walking through that area and how busy the cemetery was. Chris said he believes it wasn't a high-traffic area and recalls it to be an area where people would not frequent much.

 
  • #31
Chris confirms there were no weapons found at the location of William's body. There has been a brief mention there was possible drug paraphernalia left behind, associated with cocaine.

 
  • #32
The prosecution is showing photographs of the memorial the church put up for William when he was still unidentified. Chris has been asked about news footage of a memorial ceremony that was held after William's body was found. He states that there were numerous news companies taking footage but it was not live TV. The prosecutor is now asking about whether it generated any tips on the possible identity of the child. Chris stated that despite the volume of tips from family members of OTHER missing children, none was linked to William or his family.

 
  • #33
The defense questions Chris Harvey
A little reminder that Chris Harvey is a former DeKalb County Homicide Detective who attended the scene of William's body and was involved in the investigation.

The defense is showing Chris a map of the area where William's body was found and is questioning him on certain paths in the area concerning their distance to and from his body. The defense has led on to list objects located nearby but stated they were not necessarily connected to William or his death, Chris agrees. The lack of manner of death determination after William's body was found has been brought up and again Chris agrees that they did not know the cause of death at that time. No further questions.

 
  • #34
Next witness up, the state calls Woody Hall, a retired medical examiner
Woody was called out on February the 26th 1999 to attend the scene where William's body was found. The prosecution and Woody go through the process of what is determined once someone is found deceased. Woody says "it is all about the who, what, and why". The prosecution asked if there was anything at the scene to help identify the body. Woody is now talking about there was nothing there to personally identify him so they looked into the clothes he was wearing and where they were from. The timberland boots William was wearing were tracked down to a mall in Atlanta, not far from where his body was found.

 
  • #35
The defense questions Woody Hall
The defense is asking whether it is abnormal to attend a scene of a deceased person where their skull is away from their body. Woody responds and said he had seen it many times before. The defense is asking if Woody believes someone may have altered the scene, he said it's possible but he does not believe so. Lastly, the defense asks Woody if he was able to find a cause of death when he examined William's body, Woody says he was not able to.

 
  • #36
Next witness up, the state calls Gary Harris
Gary lived across the road from the cemetery, near to where William's body was found. At the time he worked at a warehouse, often overnight and early morning hours. A few photographs are shown of the house Gary lived at and Gary is asked to point out which bedroom was his. He says it was the far right at the front of the house. When asked if he could see the cemetery from the window, he said he could clearly. The prosecution then goes on to ask Gary what his routine was like when he would finish work and Gary says that he would go to bed and most of the time lay awake as he shared a bedroom with his two-year-old nephew. He states he would stare out the window. The prosecution asks what activity Gary would see in that area in the four years he lived there and he said "nothing". Gary claims that in late 1998 early 1999, he recalls an evening of hearing a car door slam. He looked out the window and states he assumes it was the passenger getting out in the car, then he saw and heard the driver's door slam and speed off. Gary said it was early morning and he remembers it being cold.

 
  • #37
The prosecution asked what part of the car he could see, Gary said he could see the tail lights. On a photograph, he points out the car being right next to the cemetery. The prosecution asked if he told anyone about seeing the car and Gary said the next day he told his brother. He says it was very strange to see a car or anybody at the time in the area so he found it very strange.

 
Last edited:
  • #38
Quite an important note
The prosecution asks Gary did he report what he saw, he says he did once he heard the news of a body located in that area. Gary says no law enforcement officer came out to see him and nothing came of it. The prosecution is now asking Gary about when the case resurfaced in 2020s and whether it triggered any memories and Gary states that it did and called the police again to report what he saw all those years ago.

 
  • #39
The defense questions Gary Harris
The defense is talking through the layout of the yard and in front of the house Gary lived at with his brother's family. The defense is asking about what trees were close to the house and if they may obstruct someone's view from inside the house to the cemetery. Gary agrees about some of the trees but says they were shorter/smaller back then. The defense then asks about how the lighting was in the area during late evening/early morning and Gary confirms there were no street lights. Gary states again what he saw and heard that evening and adds that due to the time of evening it was, there were no other daytime noises that would mask it. Gary affirms again how quiet the area was hence why it was unusual and memorable to him. The defense ends their questions by asking whether Gary could describe the person/people, the make/model/colour of the car. Gary agrees that he could not.

 
  • #40
Day two
The day begins with a Daubert Hearing of Dr George Jackson, medical examiner, a witness called in for the defense.
A Daubert hearing is a trial judge's evaluation of whether or not an expert's testimony and evidence are admissible. Daubert hearings occur when the validity of an expert's testimony is challenged due to the methodology used to form their opinion. It permits the challenged expert to develop his or her testimony for purposes of evaluating its admissibility. TO NOTE, the jury are not in court during this time.

The hearing begins with Dr George running through his qualifications and career experience. The point of this Daubert hearing is to challenge the prosecution's expert's view of determining toxic levels of Diphenhydramine and Acetaminophen. The defense with Dr George is stating you cannot determine the levels from muscle tissue, he claims it is not standard practice in the field of forensic toxicology. The prosecution argues that it is still useful and reliable and is used in different context/areas of forensics.

Dr Gonzales is the intended expert for the prosecution, with his theory in question. This is massive for the prosecution as they have accused Teresa of giving William a fatal dose, contributing to his death. If his testimony is overruled/questioned by Dr George's testimony, it may affect the prosecution's case in terms of the two counts of felony murder.

The judge rules that she will reserve ruling for now until she has to rule so for now it is still in the air as to whether his testimony will be accepted.

 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
1,214
Total visitors
1,351

Forum statistics

Threads
635,651
Messages
18,681,261
Members
243,336
Latest member
arlenejane57
Back
Top