IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF GWINNETT COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

STATE OF GEORGIA,

versus

MICHAEL H. CHAPEL,

Defendant.

WARRANT NOS. 93W 1677

93W 1678

93W 1679

Preliminary Hearing before the Honorable Melodic Snell

Conner, at 2:55 p.m. on April 30th, 1993, Gwinnett County

Courthouse, Lawrenceville, Georgia.

APPEARANCES

For the State:

For the Defendant:

Daniel J. Porter, Attorney at Law

Walt M. Britt, Attorney at Law

EILEEN J. SPIERS, CCR

Certified Court Reporter

2965 Trotters Pointe Drive

Snellville, Georgia 30278

(404) 978-1461

EXHI.B.LTS.:

FOR THE STATE: PAGE

State's Exhibit No. 1: Numbered List of Witnesses 86

(** Sealed)

[ID'd: pg. 4; Tendered: pg. 4; Admitted: pg. **5]

** Ordered to be sealed and made a part of the record

FOR THE DEFENSE:

Defendant's

Exhibit No. 1: Search Warrant, return, affidavit 87

(* Copy)

[ID'd: pg. 48; Tendered: pg. 79; Admitted: pg. *79]

* Copy to be substituted in place of original

INDEX OF EXAMINATION

Page

WITNESSES ON BEHALF OF THE STATE:

INVESTIGATOR JACK BURNETTE

Direct Examination by Mr. Porter 8

Cross-Examination by Mr. Britt 33

WITNESSES ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENSE:

EREN CHAPEL

Direct Examination by Mr. Britt 73

Cross-Examination by Mr. Porter 75

Redirect Examination by Mr. Britt 78

1PROCEEDINGS.:

2(Prior to the beginning of the proceedings. Judge

3Warren Davis recused himself from hearing this matter.)

4THE COURT: This will be the preliminary hearing in

5Magistrate Court of Gwinnett County this afternoon for

6Michael Harold Chapel on three warrants: 93W 1677, 93W

71678 and 93W 1679. Mr. Chapel is present in court with

8his attorney, Mr. Walt Britt.

9Mr. Britt, are you all ready to proceed?

10MR. BRITT: We're ready on behalf of the accused

11and we would enter a plea of not guilty to all charges.

12THE COURT: Mr. Britfc, have you had an opportunity

13to explain the purposes of this hearing to your client?

14MR. BRITT: That's correct. And we would waive the

15reading and informing of those rights by the Court

16pursuant to the Magistrate's Court Rule 13.2.

17THE COURT: Thank you.

18Mr. Porter, you're here on behalf of the State?

19MR. PORTER: Yes, Your Honor. I'm here on behalf

20of the State. The State is ready to proceed. There are

21two preliminary matters that need to be brought up. One

22by me, and one by defense counsel. First of all, I'd like

23to mark what I've already provided to Mr. Britt, State's

24Exhibit Number 1. And I will provide the Court with a

25copy of this, which is a witness list, numbered one

- 3 -

1through twenty-eight.

2(Whereupon State's Exhibit Number 1 was marked for

3identification purposes.)

4MR. PORTER: Your Honor, at this time I would

5inform the Court that it is the intention of the State

6based upon the desires of these witnesses, as well as

7their expressions of fear for their personal safety to,

8during this hearing, not to identify witnesses from the

9stand by their names, but to identify them by their

10witness numbers as referred to on the witness list. We

11would tender what's been marked State's Exhibit Number 1

12and we would ask that it be sealed with the record. And I

13believe this is with agreement of counsel.

14MR. BRITT: Your Honor, please, on behalf of Mr.

15Chapel we have no objection to that. But we do take issue

16with the State's contention as to any fear on behalf of

17any witnesses, and would take the position that that would

18not be anything that would be caused by the Defendant.

19But I think that's it's more in keeping with their desire

20to keep their identity separate and to keep the news media

21off of their doorsteps and from calling them and not from

22any fear of any retribution on behalf of this defendant or

23any member of his family who is present here today.

24THE COURT: Is it my understanding then, that both

25the State and the Defendant agree and stipulate that the

- 4 -

1witnesses will be called by number and referred to by

2number --

3MR. PORTER: That is correct. Your Honor.

4THE COURT: -- as they testify?

5MR. PORTER: And that the list shall be tendered to

6the Court as a State's Exhibit and sealed with the record.

7THE COURT: Any objection to State's Exhibit Number

81 being admitted and sealed and made part of the record?

9MR. BRITT: No -- no objections on behalf of the

10Defendant.

11THE COURT: State's Exhibit Number 1 will be

12admitted. It'll be sealed. Witnesses will be called by

13number. Anything else on behalf of the State?

14(Whereupon State's Exhibit Number 1 was admitted

15into evidence as ordered.)

16MR. PORTER: Nothing on behalf of the State, Your

17Honor.

18THE COURT: Anything on behalf of the defense

19before we start?

20MR. BRITT: Yes, ma'am. On behalf of the Defendant

21I would state to the Court that on Monday afternoon and

22also again on Tuesday, I came to the Magistrate's Court

23and made a request that the affidavits in support of the

24various search warrants -- there being five search

25warrants in this case -- be provided to the Defendant.

- 5 -

1And that this be done in a timely manner as the search

2warrants had been executed and the returns had been made.

3In fact, the returns were made and they had been filed

4into court. However, the State had requested and had

5filed a motion -- if Your Honor, please -- without serving

6it upon the Defendant or counsel in this case, to seal the

7record at the time of issuance of the search warrant. So

8I have no problem with the affidavits and the complaints

9and the search warrants being sealed up until times the

10returns are made. However, the returns were made at a

11time -- and I again came to the courthouse and asked to be

12provided with copies of this and was again refused copies

13under the -- under the authority of the Magistrate's

14Court. And I would object to the fact that we were not

15provided with these. We did file a motion for disclosure

16of the search warrants yesterday, upon which I did serve

17Mr. Porter.

18I received a call late yesterday afternoon on

19behalf of Magistrate, the other full-time Magistrate, Ms.

20Elbaz. And she stated that, at that time, that Mr. Porter

21had agreed to disclose the affidavits to me but that she

22id not think that he could get 'em to me today —

23yesterday. I needed those in preparation. I -- I talked

24to her about that. She made the copies and I got them

25last night. And I was able to meet with my client until

- 6 -

1eleven o'clock last night.

2However, I take the position and the legal position

3to -- and objecting to this Court, as a representative of

4the Magistrate's Court, to allow an illegal and improper

5request to be made on behalf of the State. The fact that

6when a return is made into the Court on the statutes of

7the State of Georgia, that is the conclusion at which time

8the matter is to be sealed. And that these have been held

9and have been kept away from the Defendant for a period of

10three to four days this week, of when we could have been

11operating upon these affidavits. But through the

12collusion of the District Attorney's Office, the Gwinnett

13County Police Department and the Magistrate's Court we

14have been denied access to these affidavits until 7:30

15last night. And I would object to that and bring that to

16the Court's attention.

17THE COURT: Any response, Mr. Porter?

18MR. PORTER: I don't think any response is

19necessary. Your Honor. They were provided when the motion

20was filed.

21THE COURT: Inasmuch as the documents have been

22filed, I don't think any ruling is necessary from this

23Court at this time. Any other matters you wish to take up

24may be taken up in the Superior Court in regards to the

25search warrant.

- 7 -

1With that being the case, are you ready to call

2your first witness, Mr. Porter?

3MR. PORTER: The State's ready.

4THE COURT: You can call your first witness.

5MR. PORTER: We call Investigator Jack Burnette to

6the stand.

7Whereupon,

8JACK BURNETTE

9was called as a witness by the State, and having been duly

10sworn was examined and testified as follows:

11(The witness responded "I do" to the oath.)

12DIRECT EXAMINATION:

13BY MR. PORTER:

14Q Would you state your name and your occupation,

15please?

16A My name is Jack Burnette. I'm employed at Gwinnett

17County Police Department in the Violent Crimes Unit.

18Q And could you describe your duties in the Violent

19Crimes Unit?

20A Yes, sir. We investigate kidnappings, homicides,

21anything on down to runaway children.

22Q Now Investigator Burnette, how long have you been

23doing this type of work?

24A I've been a police officer in Gwinnett County for

25nearly twenty years. I've been assigned to the Detective

- 8 -

1Division on two different occasions totalling probably ten or

2twelve years.

3Q Now were you assigned as the lead investigator in

4the death of Emogene Thompson, or the investigation into the

5death of Emogene Thompson?

6A I was.

7Q Could you describe how the Gwinnett County Police

8first became involved into this investigation?

9A Yes, sir. The -- on Friday, April 16th of 1993,

10the Gwinnett County police uniform units were dispatched to

111010 Peachtree Industrial Boulevard, Gwinnco Muffler, Sugar

12Hill, Gwinnett County, Georgia. Patrolman Byers responded.

13Patrolman Byers, upon his arrival at 8:22 a.m. met with

14witnesses one and two. He also observed the body of the lady

15who was later identified as Emogene Thompson sitting in her

161986 Lincoln Continental.

17Q All right. When you say "the body," was it obvious

18to patrolman Byers at that time, or to your knowledge, that

19the victim was dead in the car?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q And what did Patrolman Byers do in regard to this

22discovery?

23A Patrolman Byers secured the scene. They had also

24dispatched emergency medical personnel who also found that she

25was, in fact, dead there at the scene. Criminal investigators

- 9 -

1were called to the location and begin their investigation

2then.

3Q Were you among the investigators who were called to

4the scene?

5A Yes, sir.

6Q What did you observe when you arrived?

7A When I arrived at the scene. Lieutenant Latty was

8already on the scene, as well as Investigator Ervin. I

9looked at the automobile briefly. The victim, who had already

10been identified as Emogene Thompson, was sitting in the car.

11She was on the driver's side. She was seat belted in. The

12doors were locked. The ignition was on. The headlights were

13off. The driver's window was partially down. And the roadsir

14-- roadside front tire was flat. It appeared that she had at

15least one gunshot wound to the head and there was some kind of

16receipt laying in her lap. And the vehicle was parked

17approximately a good way up the driveway from PIB to the

18muffler shop. [It is doubtful that Burnette got this close to the car, these details are in the crime scene report as if told to him by Crime Scene Tech Judy Graham. Burnette, I am sure, simply joined the group at the bottom of the driveway to discus the Chapel involvement. If he had examined the death vehicle in any detail, his remarks here would have entirely different.]]

19Q Now is this muffler shop in Gwinnett County?

20A It is, indeed.

21Q Now when you began -- or after you observed this,

22was the scene processed by crime scene technicians?

23A It was.

24Q Were you -- were they able to recover any physical

25evidence at the scene other than the vehicle and the body of

- 10 -

1the victim?

2A No.

3Q Were photographs taken of the scene?

4A Yes; there were.

5Q Were you able to begin your investigation into the

6whereabouts of the victim on the previous night and into that

7morning, prior to her body being discovered?

8A Yes, sir.

9Q Would you describe where -- what you were able to

10determine about her whereabouts and her travel times in the

11evening before and the next day?

12A Yes, sir. If I might, I'll go into the partial

13list of witnesses thus far. Now what we have been able to

14establish: Witness number three, who is, in fact, Michael

15Thompson, ate dinner with his mother at the Waffle House and

16was with friends after that and last saw his mamma around 8:30

17p.m.

18Witness number four and witness number five [Amy Parker and Keith Seay, next door neighbors.] last

19saw the victim leaving at approximately 9:50 p.m., which was

20her normal routine to go to work.

21Q Now leaving -- leaving where?

22A The residence.

23Q How far is the residence from the Gwinnco Muffler

24location?

25A It's two point one miles.

- 11 -

1Q So they saw her leaving at approximately 9:50, was

2that what -- in the evening?

3A Yes, sir; 9:45 or 9:50. That's correct.

4Q If you could continue?

5A Witness number six [Delores Burel], who was a good friend of the

6victim's, when we interviewed her we learned that there had,

7in fact, had been a burglary at her house. Several thousand

8dollars were missing. Mike Chapel was the police officer

9who'd come out. He had helped her count the money and look

10the money over that she had remaining.

11Q Now when you say, "she," you're referring to the

12victim; is that correct?

13A Victim; that is correct. She'd talked with her off

14and on, according to witness number six, sometimes as many as

15two or three times a day. [Telephone Records indicate otherwise.] She said the last time she spoke

16with her was as late as 8:30 on the night of her murder. And

17at that time she was waiting on a call from Officer Chapel who

18had told her that he had recovered some of the money in

19wrapper and wanted to get with her to compare serial numbers.

20Q Now did witness number six tell you the date of the

21this burglary in the victim's home?

22A No, sir. It'd been several weeks earlier. We had

23already, by the time we talked with witness number six,

24learned the date of the burglary.

25Q All right. And what was the date of that burglary?

- 12 -

1A April 3rd. [Not true. Burglary reported on 4/3/99. Other evidence indicate discovery of money missing abou t 4/1/93.]

2Q Now the information that witness number six gave

3you, what did -- what did that person say was the source of

4that information?

5A The victim.

6Q Did you conduct any further investigation into

7anyone who may have spoken to Ms. Thompson, either the evening

8of the 16th, or into the morning of the 17th -- or excuse me,

9the 15th and 16th?

10A Yes, sir. We continued our investigation. We

11spoke with another friend who is listed as witness number

12seven [Virginia Chance]. We learned from her that Ms. Thompson -- that a police

13officer named Mike had been following her. That the police

14officer was going to get her money back and she seemed very

15excited when she talked to her. And talked to her as late as

16Wednesday before her death on Thursday.

17Witness number eight [Marsha Smith] was told by Ms. Thompson of

18the burglary. She was told on Tuesday or Wednesday that

19Officer Chapel had called saying that he had found a hundred

20dollar bill and the money wrapper.

{Now Burnette goes in to the driver witness portion of the evidence. What he leaves out is the telephone call he received lat on the first night of the investigation .It was from a driver named Ron Flasner who passed the muffler shop driveway saw two civilian cars in the driveway positioned trunk to trunk. What Flashner undoubtedly saw was the transfer of Emogene’s dead or unconscious and dying body from the trunk of the killer’s car to the trunk of her own car which they were now propositioning according to their plan.

21Q Now Investigator Burnette, in regard to the

22witnesses that are -- that are next on the witness list, did

23the Gwinnett County Police Department do anything to try and

24determine who may have gone by the Gwinnco Muffler on the

25night of the murder, which was the night of the 15th?

- 13 -

1A Yes, sir. We did. We begin holding road checks

2between 8:30 and 10:30 on Peachtree Industrial Boulevard in

3front of Gwinnco Muffler.

4Q And did you have any witnesses the morning that the

5body was discovered that gave you some time frame to work in,

6when Ms. Thompson's car may have been in the muffler shop?

7A Yes, sir; we did.

8Q And could you describe the testimony of that

9witness, please?

10A That will go to witness number nine. Witness

11number nine [this would be Thomas Morris] stated that he and his wife were travelling on

12Peachtree Industrial Boulevard near Gwinnco Muffler. He was

13going to Norcross to mail his taxes. He lives there in Sugar

14Hill. He passed by the Gwinnco Muffler at around 9:30 and

15there was no cars in the driveway at that time.

[The 9:30 passing of the driveway is not in the Morris statement, but Burnette took the statement from Morris and elaborated here on the detail.]

16 He said he returned from Gwinn -- Norcross Post Office at sometime

17between 10:00 and 10:30; he says probably shortly after 10:00,

18at which time he saw the brown — a brown car with a flat tire

19and a window partially open in the driveway.

20Q Did he notice that whether or not anyone was in the

21car or around it at that time?

22A He said he couldn't see anyone in the car.

23Q Now I'd like to skip over witness number ten and

24witness number eleven [the Arbys “ear witnesses”] and move on to the other witnesses that

25you discovered regarding vehicles that may have been at the

- 14 -

1Gwinnco during the time period that we've been discussing.

2A Okay.

3Q Beginning with witness number twelve [Tony McWaters], was this

4witness discovered at the roadblocks that were run by the

5Gwinnett County Police Department?

6A Yes, sir. Several of these witnesses were, but

7there's several that were not.

8Q All right. And if you could go through and

9describe what these people saw in relation to vehicles that

10might have been at the muffler shop?

11A Yes, sir. Witness number twelve [Tony McWaters] basically stated

12between 8:45 and 9:00 p.m. he saw a police car in the

13driveway, headlights on, facing the street.

14Witness number thirteen [Stacey Turner] set the time between 9:20

15and 9:25 p.m. saw a Gwinnett County police car in the driveway

16facing PIB with the dome light on.

17Witness number fifteen [Sean Charles], believed the time to be

18around 9:30 p.m., saw a Gwinnett County police car with a

19white male facing PIB, or Peachtree Industrial Boulevard, in

20the driveway of Gwinnco Muffler.

21Witness number sixteen [Pat Gimothy], at 9:45, saw some type of

22law enforcement car at Gwinnco Muffler saying that something

23reflected on the sides. [Lt. Latty took Gimothy’s statement and tried to get her to say it was a police car. In reality it was the victim’s car.]

24Witness number seventeen [Ed Schmanski] said between 9:00 and 9:15

25p.m. saw a police car in the front area of Gwinnco Muffler.

- 15 -

1Witness number eighteen [Jennifer Schmanski], between 9:00 and 9:15 saw

2a police car in the driveway facing out.

3Witness number nineteen [Allen Robertson] was not sure of the time,

4maybe 10:00 -- 10:15, saw a Gwinnett County police car with

5blue lights on in the entrance lane to Gwinettco Muffler [sic]

6in back of a brown colored car.

7Witness number twenty [Harlan Preston] saw a police unit on a

8traffic stop at Gwinnettco Muffler [sic] and in the driveway

9around 9:50 -- 9:55, blue light on and it was on top of the

10car.

11Q All right. Now why is the fact that the blue light

12was on the top of the car significant to your investigation?

13A Well we were certainly trying to determine --

14originally, we were trying to determine who the police car

15was, thinking we might very well, possibly, have a witness

16that was there prior, or maybe made a traffic stop, or could

17possibly have seen something prior to the murder.

18Q And would the fact that it was a light on top

19indicate that it was, in fact, a police officer, as opposed to

20someone who might just have a blue light?

21A It is; indeed.

22Q Now another witness, particularly the witness

23number twenty-one [Paul Omodt, Driving with eyewitness Karl Kautter], also indicated that they saw a Gwinnett

24County police car making a traffic stop in the Gwinnco

25Muffler; is that correct?

- 16 -

1A Yes, sir.

2Q Could you describe the testimony of witness number

3twenty-one and twenty-two [Karl Kautter]?

4A Witness number twenty-one said that approximately

59:45 p.m. he saw a Gwinnett County police car on a traffic

6stop at Gwinnco Muffler behind a black or a black four-door

7domestic car. He saw a police officer out of the car with a

8flashlight in his left hand, bent over looking into the car.

9The police officer was wearing a rain -- a yellow raincoat.

10He was a white male, at least six foot tall. The police car

11was a bubble-type car; white, with Gwinnett County decals. He

12said he continued north and as he continued north he saw the

13police car -- the same police car come up beside him to the

14right. He said it appeared that he started to turn right on

15the road that goes to Petro Lane [This is cleared up at trial.], then went on up to Georgia

1620, started to turn right on Georgia 20, but continued on PIB

17to the next right, and turned right going back into the city

18of Buford.

19Q Was there anyone with witness number twenty-one?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q Could you describe their testimony?

22A Witness number twenty-two was a passenger in the

23car with witness number twenty-one. He saw the police officer

24with a flashlight. Saw a Gwinnett County decals on the car.

25Saw the officer was wearing rain gear and only had on a clear

- 17 -

1hat cover. He went past -- as the officer came past the car

2to the right-hand side, he looked over at the officer. He

3said at that time the officer did not have his hat on. He was

4a white male with brown hair. He estimates the time at around

59:45 p.m [This time was clearly 10 to 20 minutes later from testimony.] plus or minus five minutes.

6Q Was he able to identify anyone as the police

7officer in the vehicle that pulled up beside him on the right?

8A Yes, sir.

9Q And who did he identify?

10A We instructed a photographic line-up consisting of

11eight photographs of police officers in our department [Rigged – see Lineup Section]. The

12photographic line-up was shown to witness number twenty-two.

13He immediately picked out photograph number three that of

14Mike Chapel. [Untrue, Kautter pickup out number one first, but saying he was too tall, then picked number three.]

15Q Now --

16A Saying that it's this officer but he doesn't have a

17mustache now.

18Q Did the photograph of Mike Chapel have a mustache

19in the line-up?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q Now Investigator Burnette, did these witnesses,

22twenty-one and twenty-two, indicate to you that they ever lost

23sight of the police vehicle after they passed Gwinnco Muffler?

24A No, sir. [BS – [See Drive Witness Section.]

25Q Did they definitely say that they did not lose

- 18 -

1sight of the vehicle? [Wooded area comes almost to PIB on that side of driveway. Omodt and Kautter would have lost sight of the vehicle in the driveway almost immediately.]

2A They said -- they identified it -- that they said

3that was the car -- period.

4Q Now we've gone -- did the witness see anything else

5in the car, or any -- or that the officer did anything that

6aided in your investigation at that point?

7A Not that I recall.

8Q Could you describe what the lighting conditions are

9at that intersection? [Implication untrue. Cars never side by side at any intersection – see Drive Witness Section. “So called ID took place as cars were between the PIB four-lane transition and Roosevelt Circle. There are no lights in that area; in fact it is the darkest part of that segment of PIB.]

10A Yes, sir. Let me -- let me explain what we did

11with the identification. [Burnette avoids the intersection implication.] I went back up to Peachtree

12Industrial Boulevard to begin with and made several trips in

13that area to see if I personally could identify people in cars

14next to me pulling around to me on the right. That is, in

15fact, possible [Day or night? Burnette does not say.].

16I thought that possibly the witness may have been

17written a ticket by Officer Chapel. We pulled all the traffic

18citations. We couldn't find where Officer Chapel had, in

19fact, written any tickets to this man. We pulled incident

20reports, thinking perhaps Mike Chapel had taken some kind of

21report from this man. He had not. And as far as I know, he's

22never had any kind of contact at all with Mike Chapel prior to

23this incident.

24Q Now were there other witnesses who saw the victim's

25car, the Lincoln Continental in the driveway of Gwinnco,

- 19 -

1either past the relevant time frame, or at any other time

2during that night?

3A Yes, sir; there are a number of witnesses who have

4seen the car. Witness number twenty-three [James Guthrie] saw a Lincoln

5Continental parked in the driveway by 10:30 or 11:00 p.m [The time was between 10:50 and 10:55.]. It

6was by itself.

7Witness number twenty-four [Mack Paige] saw the car in the

8driveway at approximately 11:30 p.m. [Confirms Victim’s car not moved.]

9Q Now Investigator Burnette, I'd like to go back to

10witnesses number ten and eleven [The Guthries – ear witnesses. – very flawed testimony because of physical impairments that became obvious during testimony in court Mr. Guthrie was in fact quite hard of hearing.] and ask you: Have you just

11come across any witnesses who live in the area that may have

12heard gunshots or may have heard a sound of the killing

13actually taking place?

14MR. BRITT: Of course, if Your Honor, please. I

15would object to Mr. Porter's characterization of "hearing

16the killing taking place." I think that the witness can

17testify that, in fact, that he may have reported that some

18gunshots were heard. But I don't think that this witness

19can testify that these are the gunshots at the time of any

20killing.

21MR. PORTER: Your Honor, we're sure -- we know that

22a killing took place. We know the relevant time periods.

23And any witnesses that heard gunshots in that relevant

24time period, heard the killing take place. And that is an

25accurate characterization, assuming that they were within

- 20 -

1range of the relevant location to hear the gunshots.

2MR. BRITT: That's a conclusion on behalf of the

3witness.

4THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection. And ask

5you just to rephrase the question, please.

6BY MR. PORTER: (Resuming)

7Q Investigator Burnette, have you had any witnesses

8come forward, or have you located any witnesses that heard

9gunshots during the relevant time period that we have been

10discussing between nine and ten p.m. on the 15th of April?

11A Yes, sir.

12Q And could you describe the testimony of those

13witnesses?

14A Very simply, it's witness number ten and witness

15number eleven who are husband and wife. They heard two

16gunshots. The husband said that it was sometime between nine

17and ten p.m. The wife says it was sometime after 9:20.

18Q Now Investigator Burnette, I'd like to go back for

19a moment, if you would, to the scene, itself. When Ms.

20Thompson's body was removed from the car, was her handbag or

21purse or wallet located in the vehicle? [Crime scene photos show a small combination cigarette case and wallet. This item is not shown as recovered from the crime scene on any official document or anywhere else. The victim’s driver’s license was hver found either, even in the reputed stolen purse that was fond buried several months after the trial by a child playing in the woods behind the victim’s neighbor’s trailer.]

22A No, sir.

23Q And did you receive any information in the course

24of your investigation as to where any money that she might

25have carried, where she kept it?

- 21 -

1A It should have been only in her purse. And the

2purse should have been on the front seat of the car.

3Q Now going on with the investigation. After you had

4the identification of Mike Chapel from witness number twenty-

5two, did you begin or did you bring Mike Chapel in for an

6interview to the Gwinnett County Police Department?

7A Yes, sir.

8Q Did he -- was he able to recount to you for his

9whereabouts during the period between nine and ten on the

10night of April the 15th?

11MR. BRITT: Of course, if Your Honor, please. I

12would object to "account to Mr. Burnette." I don't think

13that anyone has to account to Mr. Burnette. I think that

14the proper question is, that he can ask him what he asked

15this man about where his whereabouts were. And he can

16make the recitation as to where that was, but as far as

17accounting to, or justifying anything, I don't think

18that's a proper question. I would object to that.

19THE COURT: Objection overruled. You can go ahead.

20BY MR. PORTER: (Resuming)

21Q Was he able to explain to you his whereabouts

22during the time period between 9:00 and 10:00 on the night of

23the 15th?

24A No, sir. [Untrue – four firefighters stated and testified that Chapel was with them at Fire 14 during this period.]

25Q Did he describe to you at anytime where he may have

- 22 -

1been between 9:00 and 9:30 on that night?

2A He said that originally, that he had been at the

3precinct. [Fire 14 stands next to the precinct.] However, he had gone from the precinct by 9:30 or

4possibly earlier. [This was a mistaken statement by a confused and disoriented Chapel at the end of his interrogation and Lt. Latty was haranguing him about religion and going to hell and goes against all other evidence developed by the police and others.]

5Q And do police records indicate that he responded to

6any police calls at any time during that relevant time period,

7between 9:00 and 10:00?

8A We know at 9:56 [9:57] he was dispatched by radio to an

9address on Arden Drive, which is in Pebblebrook Subdivision Easiest to read street descriptions at 200 percent.] on

10the other side of Buford, off Thompson Mill Road.

11Q And approximately how far is that from the Gwinnco

12Muffler?

13A Depending on which route you travel, it can be five

14to six -- seven miles.

15Q Have you actually had that time and distance run by

16police officers at the Gwinnett County Police Department?

17A We've done several time and distance studies going

18 routes through the city, around the city and they

19all run anywhere from eight to fourteen minutes at normal

20traffic speeds, with given red lights and this that and the

21other. [Were these test run at night in one of the worst storms in North Georgia of 1993?]

22Q And how long did it take Officer Chapel, according

23to police records to respond to the call that he received at

249:56?

25A Twelve minutes.

- 23 -

1Q As a result of this investigation so far, did you

2begin to look into the financial aspects of Mike Chapel's

3life?

4A Yes, sir.

5Q And could you describe to the Court what

6information you begin to gather regarding his financial

7status? [Most of what follows about the Chapel’s finances is pur imagination. See Eren Chapel’s testimony below.]

8A Thus far the financial portfolio's certainly not

9been completed, but thus far, it would appear that his

10financial condition is somewhat bleak, [What young family’s just getting started are not?] to say the best. His

11credit ratings show eight and nine's, which is pretty low on

12the scale. His banking records show that he's had a number of

13bounced checks that he's had to account for. The utilities at

14his business in Buford and at his home have been arrears. And

15there's just -- there's nothing much positive about the

16financial situation.

17Q Have you received any notification from

18governmental agencies regarding his financial state?

19A Yes, sir.

20Q Could you describe that for the Court, please?

21A On April the 10th, the Internal Revenue Service

22notified him that they were going to audit him for, I believe,

23it was 1990 taxes. And I felt like [Was Investigator Burnette a CPA and in possession of all of Chapel’s financial records at the time?] that he was something like

24four thousand dollars was owed -- going to be owed to the

25Internal Revenue Service. [Inspector Burnette should have been made aware that many Internal Revenue audits result in refunds.]

- 24 -

1Q Now were you able, in the course of your

2investigations, to determine the denominations of the money

3that Emogene Thompson had received prior to the burglary?

4A Yes, sir. What we had done, is we had gone back

5and tried to establish all the money that she had received as

6death benefits, that she had collected. We know that she had

7collected one check for around fifteen thousand dollars. And

8another one, we are told, for around ten thousand dollars.

9We know that she deposited part of the money. And that part

10of the money she spent and kept out with her. We know that a

11time share program that she had joined was intending to sue

12her.

13On March the 1st she went to the bank and withdrew

14six -- the six thousand, three hundred and seventy-five to

15seventy-three dollars, something of that nature. The teller

16at the bank was interviewed. I can't recall the name of the

17bank right off the top of my head. However, she could pay her

18the three hundred and seventy-five dollars out of the till.

19She had to buy the six hundred [sic] from the head teller,

20which was given to her in hundred and fifty dollar

21denominations.

22Q Based upon that information did you begin to

23investigate the spending pattern or did you receive any

24information regarding the spending pattern of Mike Chapel in

25the days immediately after the murder?

- 25 -

1A Yes, sir.

2Q And could you describe the first time that you can

3locate him spending any money, based upon witnesses'

4statements?

5A Yes, sir. On Friday morning April 16th, while we

6we're working the crime scene Officer Chapel went to the

7Sunshine Car Wash in Lawrenceville, in his patrol car. He

8bought a number four car wash, which is nineteen dollars and

9ninety-five cents. With his police discount, it came to

10seventeen ninety-five. He paid for this with a hundred dollar

11bill. [Untrue, this testimony was impeached by the witness herself. Chapel paid her with a twenty.]

12Q At any time later -- did -- can you discover him

13buying or purchasing items with bills of large denominations?

14A Yes, sir.

15Q And could you describe those for the Court?

16A Well the next thing we know of, is -- and it's

17still continuing -- is on Monday morning, April 19th, at

18approximately 1:35 a.m., he went to the Gwinnett County Jail

19in Lawrenceville, Georgia, and he bonded out a young lady by

20the name of Eraser Forg, I believe it is F-O-R-G (Spelling),

21paying a two hundred and forty dollar cash bond. We don't

22know yet how that was paid. [The young lady in question got frisky at a birthday party for Eren, Mike’s wife, and the police were called. She was sassy with the officer, and was arrested. Between 12 and 20 people at the party chipped in for her bail, and Mike, who was not at the party and was babysitting at home, was elected to bail her out. Mike made up the few dollars difference between the money collected and the bail amount.] However, on the same day he went

23to Gwinnett Screen Graphics in Lawrenceville. He ordered five

24hundred and ninety-seven dollars worth of T-shirts for his

25gym [For advertising, i.e., IronWorld Gym imprints.] . He paid for these T-shirts In cash; in six, one hundred

- 26 -

1dollar bills. [See Eren Chapel’s testimony below describing the business loan from Jack Dudley of $1,600.00, all in hundred dollar bills, and the names of other investors who worked with Chapel and were interested in Mike building his business by attracting more people to the IronWorld Gym.]

2Q To your knowledge, has he paid off -- you mentioned

3earlier in your testimony that there were some problems with

4utility payments --

5A Yes, sir. We are told that there are utility

6problems.

7Q Have you been able to determine whether or not any

8of those utility payments have been brought up to date since

9the day of the murder?

10A On April 23rd, Mike paid his utility bill in the

11City of Buford. It totalled around three hundred and fifty-

12five dollars, I believe it was.

13Q How much?

14A Three hundred and fifty-five, I believe, is what it

15was. Is what was listed on the receipt.

16Q Have you been able to determine the manner of

17payment in that?

18A It was a check on that.

19Q Now Investigator Burnette, on the night that Chapel

20was arrested, did he agree to speak to police officers?

21A Yes, sir.

22Q And was that interview videotaped?

23A Yes, sir.

24Q Did he, at that time, give you any explanation

25other than what you've already related, as to his whereabouts

- 27 -

1that night?

2A Other than saying he was at the precinct; no, sir.

3Q Have you been able to verify through interviews

4with personnel at the precinct whether or not he was there at

5the times that he stated?

6A It's somewhat confused at the times he had stated.

7I think the final thing he had told us is, he was there. He

8left around 9:30 possibly, or earlier. However, with the

9firemen, there were three police officers there sometimes,

10there was two police officers there sometimes. Their times

11differ. And it actually wasn't much help to us as far

12establishing who was and who wasn't. We also interviewed

13Officer Reddick and Sergeant Dedee Stone. Untrue, the firefighters were unequivocal in there statements, and both Reddy and Stone were proven to be liars about just about everything at trial. On the night of Chapel’s arrest, Brian Reddy even denied that Chapel was with them at Fire 14. That night.]

14Q Now going on in the statement, did he indicate to

15you that he had had contact in early April with the victim,

16Emogene Thompson?

17A Yes, sir.

18Q Did he indicate to you that he had, in fact,

19investigated the burglary that she had reported?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q Did he indicate to you whether or not he had filed

22a report on her?

23A Yes, sir. He -- he told us he didn't file a

24report. Untrue, Chapel filed an oral report to his supervisor Sgt. Donald Stone who was waiting for Chapel a few blocks from the Thompson trailer. Stone told Chapel to write a report and Chapel began to do so, but he then got busy and forgot to complete it. The incomplete report was found in Chapel’s briefcase at the time of his arrest.] He called it a bullshit case. And said that he felt

25that the son had taken the money, which very -- may very well

- 28 -

1be true. However, he spent considerable time with the victim.

2We asked him about the hundred dollar bill and the wrapper.

3He said he did, in fact, tell her that. However, it was as a

4ruse for her to tell her son in order to scare him into giving

5the money back. We pointed out that we were somewhat

6confused, because if it was a ruse, she had no reason to tell

7her friends that she expected the return of the money and that

8Mike was supposed to be meeting with her to compare serial

9numbers.

10Q And what was his response to that?

11A There was no response.

12Q Did he also indicate to you whether or not he had

13any contact with Ms. Thompson after that April the 3rd

14burglary?

15A Yes, sir; he has had contact. He says that he had

16no contact after, I believe he said, April 6th or 7th with

17her. But he had had contact and talked with her about the

18situation. [Chapel admitted and it was general knowledge that he contacted the victim on the afternoon of the 4^th in response to a phone call that he tried and failed to return. He also had contact with her son when they accidentally met at a mall where the son worked at the Subway Sandwich Shop These were Chapel’s only two contacts with the family after the initial 911 response call.]

19Q So between April the 6th or 7th, and April the

2015th, he denied that he had had any contact with her?

21A Yes, sir. That's correct.

22Q Now on that evening, after he was placed under

23arrest, did you have an occasion to search his police vehicle?

24A Yes, sir.

25Q Could you describe for the Court the contents of

- 29 -

1the police -- the trunk of the police vehicle?

2A There were a number of things we found in the car.

3Mostly, of course, authorized equipment. And we are still

4continuing our examination of the automobile. However, at

5that time, we found a military-issue M-16 rifle. It is fully

6automatic. It has a selector switch with the serial number

7ground off of it. A scope on the rifle. A bipod for the

8rifle. A silencer. A hundred and eighty-nine rounds of

9ammunition, southern magazines. [Chapel was a lead officer if not the leader of the county swat team. As such he could have been expected to have an array of weapons, perhaps some not quite legal, in his bag of weapon’s tricks. It was only months later that the Los Angeles police had to either buy or borrow some of these same weapons when the shootout in Beverly Hills with two heavily armored and heavily armed men tried to rob a bank in that area. It was only luck that kept many of these officers alive through that horrendous gun battle.]

10Q Now did the silencer that was found in the trunk go

11to the M-16?

12A We don't believe it did. I don't know --

13personally know that much about guns, but I'm told that it

14probably goes to a MAC 10.

15Q Now Investigator Burnette, I'd like to go back to

16the scene one more time. I apologize for jumping around, but

17how -- you stated earlier that one of the tires was flat on

18the car?

19A It was.

20Q How did that tire become flattened?

21A The tire was flattened where the car was sitting.

22It was flattened with a single-edged weapon that -- and what I

23mean by that, is one edge sharp, the other edge was dull. And

24there was no sawing, it was a straight in, straight out cut.

25Q And were you able to recover any edged weapons from

- 30 -

1the patrol car of Mike Chapel, or from any of the other

2locations that you searched?

3A From Mike, we got what's commonly known I guess, as

4a leatherman's tool that has a blade on it. It has a single

5edge, sharp edge and a single dull edge. We recovered another

6knife out of a pant's pocket that we was told was his pant's

7pocket there at the gym. It has a single edge. We also

8recovered a knife from his locker and a double edge knife from

9his patrol car.

10Q Now the leatherman's tool has been excluded as the

11weapon that flattened the tire; is that correct?

12A Yes, sir.

13Q Also I'd like to go to the autopsy that was done.

14Were you -- were you able to determine from the autopsy, the

15cause of death for Emogene Thompson?

16A Yes, sir.

17Q And what was that?

18A Two gunshot wounds to the head.

19Q Were they able to recover the projectiles that --

20that were the result of the gunshot wound?

21A We did.

22Q And type of bullets are they?

23A They're lead .38 calibre semi-wadcutters.

24Q Now from those bullets were -- was the crime lab

25able to determine the type of weapon that fired the gun --

- 31 -

1that fired the bullets?

2A Yes, sir.

3Q And what was that?

4A Charter Arms, or RG.

5Q .38 calibre?

6A Yes, sir.

7Q Were you able to recover a .38 calibre Charter Arms

8or RG from any of the places you searched in connection with

9this case?

10A No, sir.

11Q Now Investigator Burnette, also has the processing

12of the police car continued?

13A Yes, sir. It has.

14Q And did it continue as late as last night? [The now infamous blood spot on the armrest of Chapel’s unit. See Burnette’s notes regarding the case meeting of the day before.]

15A Yes, sir.

16Q And could you describe to the Court the findings

17that were made last night in regard to the police car?

18A Last night our Crime Scene technicians found what

19they have tentatliy -- tentatively identified as blood on the

20armrest of the passenger seat, which is beside the driver's

21seat, together in the center console, and on the left-hand

22side, next to the armrest up on the seat.

23Q And has that seat been removed and sent to the

24Crime Lab?

25A Yes, sir. It's being removed and sent to the Crime

- 32 -

1Lab.

2Q And any other items being sent to the Crime Lab for

3analysis for blood?

4A There are a number of other items, including Mike

5Chapel's leather gear, his raincoat, all the knives. There

6are several things down there. Yes, sir. [Nothing was found on any of this other gear.]

7Q Investigator Burnette, is this investigation still

8continuing?

9A Yes, sir. [Untrue, the real investigation was over as soon as the police planted Emogene’s blood in Chapel’s unit. They knew what the outcome of that would be.] For documentation, see Burnette’s notes after the case meeting of April 29^th.]

10Q Thank you.

11MR. PORTER: That's all the questions I have.

12THE COURT: Cross-examination, Mr. Britt?

13CROSS-EXAMINATION

14BY MR. BRITT: [Walt Britt does a very credible job with the documents submitted since he received them and the search warrants on at 7:30 PM the night before. It was obvious though that he had not interviewed any of the defense witnesses, particularly the firefighters, and never would, as yet. This was Walt’s last hurrah in this case. He would spend the next two years simply fighting Porter’s motion to have him, Britt, removed from the case because of trivial conflict of interest problem.]

15Q How long have you been doing this. Jack --

16policing?

17A Twenty years, Walt.

18Q And in that twenty years, part of that time you

19were a patrolman; is that correct?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q And during that period of time when you were a

22patrolman, you had a yellow rainslicker; is that correct?

23A No, sir. As long back as I was, it was orange.

24Q It was orange; okay. But that is what was issued

25back then; is that correct?

- 33 -

1A That's correct.

2Q And the yellow ones are issued now?

3A Yes, sir.

4Q And when you were policing on the street, as far as

5patrolling, you had a knife in your vehicle; is that correct?

6A Yes, sir.

7Q Back when you was patrolling on the streets, you

8had a clear rain visor for your hat?

9A We had an issued rain visor; yes, sir.

10Q You never used it?

11A They were orange.

12Q Orange?

13A Yes, sir.

14Q And you had that; is that correct?

15A Yes, sir.

16Q When you were policing on the street --

17patrolling -- you had a gun that was not an issue gun in your

18vehicle, too; didn't you?

19A Yes, sir.

20Q And you would have what often-times is said -- you

21would have what the police issued you and then you would bring

22whatever else you thought you needed; is that correct?

23A No, sir. I had a police issue side arm and I had a

24Remington 870 shotgun that was my personal weapon that I had

25qualified with.

- 34 -

1Q And back when you were patrolling and on the road

2and your finances wasn't real good, it was sort of paycheck to

3paycheck, too; wasn't it?

4A Possibly paycheck to paycheck. But I don't know

5that they're -- have ever been in the same state that we found

6these in.

7Q But I mean you and I can agree that -- and we

8discussed before, I would say on occasions -- that police

9don't make a whole lot of money. Is that a fair statement?

10A That's a fair statement.

11Q And during this period of time, Mike Chapel is

12married; is that correct?

13A At this particular time. Yes, sir.

14Q He's got two kids?

15A Yes, sir.

16Q Now he also had a gym up there; is that correct?

17A Yes, sir.

18Q And you searched his gym; is that correct?

19A Yes, sir.

20Q And you searched three lockers, I believe, that

21were at the Gwinnett County Police Department; is that a fair

22statement?

23A At the northside precinct. Yes, sir.

24Q Now the northside precinct is located there on

25Highway -- on Buford Highway right across from the Kroger

- 35 -

1Shopping Center; is that correct?

2A Yes, sir.

3Q And connected to that is also the fire station; is

4that true?

5A That's true.

6Q And Mr. Chapel, since he's been with the Gwinnett

7County Police Department, has been stationed in the Buford

8precinct?

9A As far as I'm aware. Yes, sir.

10Q Approximately eight years?

11A Yes, sir.

12Q Do you know how long he's had the gym?

13A No, sir. I don't.

14Q Now you searched his gym; is that correct?

15A Yes, sir.

16Q You had it searched; is that correct?

17A I'm sorry?

18Q You had it searched; you didn't personally do the

19searching?

20A Yes, sir. That's correct.

21Q And you searched his truck which was located there

22at the precinct?

23A Yes, sir.

24Q You searched his house; is that correct?

25A Yes, sir.

- 36 -

1Q And you searched all three lockers, at the Gwinnett

2County Police Department, that he utilized at the northside

3precinct?

4A Yes, sir.

5Q And you had searched his bank records; is that

6correct?

7A We have not had -- yes, sir. We've begin a

8financial profile. We certainly haven't completed one.

9Q But I mean -- I'm certain that you have checked his

10deposits within the last month, in the month of April. You

11know what transpired in April?

12A No, sir. We don't have all those records yet.

13Q You don't have all those records?

14A No, sir.

15Q And in all these searches and in all these -- and

16you also searched his vehicle, his county issued vehicle; is

17that correct?

18A Yes, sir.

19Q And in all these searches, you hadn't found a gun;

20is that correct?

21A That's correct.

22Q You hadn't found any money; is that correct?

23A That's correct.

24Q And you haven't found his clear visor; is that

25correct?

- 37 -

1A Are you talking about his rain cap?

2Q Yeah.

3A I believe we have his rain cap.

4Q You do have it?

5A I think we do.

6Q You think you do; okay. And it would be shown on

7the return of the search warrant if you had it; is that

8correct?

9A If we had seized it out of the car, we would have;

10yes, sir.

11Q Seized it out of the car. And if it's not listed

12on the return, you don't have it do you?

13A Well not if it's not listed on the return to the

14car we wouldn't.

15Q And that would've been in his -- the one of his

16police vehicle; is that correct?

17A Yes, sir. Well I say, yes, sir. His raincoat

18wasn't found in his police vehicle either.

19Q All right. Where was the raincoat found?

20A I believe if you'll look at the search warrant, the

21return is -- I believe the raincoat, as I recall, was found in

22the locker.

23Q Right. So it wouldn't have been found. It would

24sort of make sense that if he had his raincoat on and he took

25off his raincoat and he had on a rain cap, he might have took

- 38 -

1off the rain cap at the same time; isn't that correct?

2A He might have.

3Q It makes sense, though, don't it. Jack?

4A Yes, sir.

5Q And you didn't find a clear rain visor there at the

6northside precinct, did you?

7A Mr. Britt, I want to say that we have a clear rain

8visor but I -- I don't recall where it came from right off the

9top of my head.

10Q But if it's not listed on the returns --

11A It didn't come out of the search warrants.

12Q It didn't come out of the search warrant?

13A If it's not listed on the return, it didn't come

14out of search warrant.

15Q Okay. And then you shouldn't have one? Or you

16couldn't account for where it came from?

17A Mr. Britt, I'm certainly not going to get into an

18argument with you.

19Q Well I'm not arguing with you. Jack. I'm just

20asking you.

21A I think we have one. I can't tell you where it

22come from.

23Q But if it's not -- what I'm trying to get -- what

24I'm asking you, here is -- is that, if it's not listed on the

25search warrant inventories, that's where it would be listed;

- 39 -

1is that correct?

2A If it came out of the search warrants; yes.

3Q If it came out of the search warrants. And the

4search warrants, you searched everything the man had; is that

5correct?

6A That we knew about.

7Q That you knew about?

8A Yes, sir.

9Q Have you searched anywhere else?

10A No, sir.

11Q So as you sit here today, if you've got that rain

12cap, it would've had to come out of one them search warrants?

13A Or somebody -- I'm trying to remember where -- I

14can't say for sure.

15Q You can't say for sure?

16A No, sir. I don't remember.

17Q Well if — it'd been sort of unusual in this case

18if somebody'd come up here and said Sergeant Burnette, here is

19Mike Chapel's rain hat; that didn't happen did it?

20A No, sir.

21Q And he didn't hand it to you; do you recall that?

22A No, sir.

23Q So it just sort of seems to me that it would've

24been in one of these searches that you conducted. And you've

25searched everything that you know of today?

- 40 -

1A Yes, sir.

2Q And you think there may be a rain hat, you just

3don't know?

4A No, sir. I don't.

5Q And you're not willing to concede to me here today,

6under oath, that that would've had to have been listed on the

7inventory of the search warrant?

8A Sure it would have. I've said that.

9Q So if it's not there on the inventories --

10A What I'm telling you, Mr. Britt, is I think we may

11have one, but if we do, I don't recall right off the top of my

12head where it came from.

13Q Okay. So you don't know if it's his or not, do

14you?

15A No, sir.

16Q Now would it be a fair statement to say that on

17April the 15th, or some hour or two hours during that early

18evening, that the whole northside watch of the Gwinnett County

19Police Department and the whole watch for the Gwinnett County

20Fire Department was there at the northside precinct watching

21TV?

22A Off and on. Yes, sir.

23Q Off and on?

24A Yes, sir. The firemen say they got calls and went

25in and out.

- 41 -

1Q But the police was there the whole time?

2A That's not what they say. They say basically, they

3were there from around eight o'clock until sometime after ten.

4Mike says that he was there up until around 9:30 and maybe a

5little before when he left.

6Q But, for say, some hour-and-a-half to two hours,

7the whole northside watch was there at the precinct?

8A Well the Buford cars; yes, sir.

9Q All the Buford cars. Now what other cars are

10located in that area, as far as police units?

11A We have Sheriff's Office --

12Q Excuse me for just a second. Sergeant. What is the

13zone of coverage for the northside precinct?

14A The entire precinct will cover down as far as the

15mall. However, the cars that you're in question of would be

16in and around Buford.

17Q The Buford watch, let's call it Buford watch. They

18would be --

19A Would be that particular zone that Mike Chapel was

20assigned to, would take you in the area of PIB.

21Q Okay. Would it be fair to say that this zone goes

22from the greater Buford area to 317 down in Suwanee, at one

23border?

24A I think that's fair. Yes, sir.

25Q And would you agree that, then, it would run north

- 42 -

1until you got to the Forsyth County line?

2A Yes, sir.

3Q And then would you also agree that it would run

4along the Hall County line on the northern end of the county

5up there?

6A Yes, sir.

7Q And would you also agree that the limits of the

8zone back towards Lawrenceville would be around I-85?

9A Yes, sir.

10Q How many cars were in service?

11A Total county?

12Q Yes. In that area that I --

13A In that area?

14Q -- just described?

15A That -- a sergeant and two zone cars.

16Q Were there any other types of vehicles with --

17emergency-type vehicles in the area, that you're aware of?

18A Not that we can account for; no, sir.

19Q Are there any Georgia State Patrol cars assigned to

20that area?

21A Yes, sir. During that time, the Georgia State

22Patrol had one car out. He was working a wreck in Forsyth

23County. The Sheriff's Department tells us that they had one

24car but he was not in that -- he was assigned to that area but

25he was not in that particular area at that time. We've talked

- 43 -

1with the Sugar Hill Marshal, we have problems with the Sugar

2Hill Marshal because he's a left-handed shooter. That's not

3consistent with what we see the gunshot wounds on our victim.

4Suwanee can account for their cars.

5Q What I'm asking you, what other cars are available?

6A I can't think of any.

7Q But there's Suwanee, there's Sugar Hill, Buford.

8Buford's got a car; isn't that true?

9A Yes, sir.

10Q Okay. Suwanee's got a car; is that correct?

11A Yes, sir.

12Q Sugar Hill's got a car?

13A Yes, sir.

14Q Now when we go back to this April 3rd burglary,

15when was the first time you talked to Mike Chapel about the

16fact that he had answered a call at this home?

17A We had started, of course, trying to locate the

18burglary report while we were on the scene. We were told

19about it by the fami^. But they couldn't tell us who the

20officer was, this, that and the other. I got back to

21headquarters around 1:30. I got a call from Captain Cantrell

22at the northside precinct around 1:50. He said Officer Chapel

23and Sergeant Stone had something they needed to tell me. And

24at that time I talked on the telephone with Mike. He told me

25about having answered the call out there. He told me that he

- 44 -

1felt like the son had taken the money. That he felt like that

2it was a bullshit call. He felt like, that, as I said, the

3son had taken the money. And that for that purpose he didn't

4write a report.

5Q And in fact, it was later found on his log sheets

6to be logged as a domestic; is that correct?

7A On the front of the log sheet where you log calls,

8the call was not logged in.

9Q Right.

10A On the back of the log sheet, to where you count

11calls, he had counted a call as an eighty-six.

12Q And an eighty-six is?

13A Is a domestic dispute.

14Q And Jack, if you were out there working a situation

15like that, would you count that as a domestic call?

16A Yes, sir. But I'd also log my times on the front

17of my log sheet.

18Q I'm not quibbling about record keeping. Jack. I'm

19just saying would you log that as a domestic call?

20A Given the circumstances, I would have probably

21filed a theft report and let a detective handle it.

22Q What about, if the mother said that she didn't want

23to prosecute?

24A To cover myself, I'd probably still write some sort

25of theft report and let a detective close it.

- 45 -

1Q But you would consider it to be a domestic?

2A And I would include that in the report. Yes, sir.

3Q And Sergeant Stone confirmed this to you; is that

4correct -- the scenario?

5A I didn't talk to Sergeant Stone at that time. But

6at some point and time later; yes, sir. He told an

7investigator, one of the investigators about it.

8Q And he confirmed that at the time, that Mike Chapel

9had told him about the call and that the mother and he had

10concluded that the son had stolen the money; is that correct?

11A Yes, sir.

12Q And that what, in fact, had been related, was that

13the money was taken out of a secret hiding place and that half

14of the money had been put back; is that correct?

15A I believe what has -- been related by who?

16Q By Sergeant Stone.

17A I don't recall that, Mr. Britt.

18Q You don't recall that?

19A No, sir.

20Q Do you recall anything about half the money being

21taken or half the money being put back somewhere?

22A Yes, sir. In talking with Officer Chapel.

23Q And that was what he told you at the very

24beginning?

25A That's the way the theft happened. That whoever

- 46 -

1came in had taken half the money and put half the money back.

2Yes, sir.

3Q And burglars don't usually do that, do they,

4Sergeant Burnette?

5A Certainly not.

6Q Okay. Somebody in the family that was trying to

7take some money and maybe hide what they were doing; that'd be

8something they do? That'd be a fair characterization?

9A That'd be a logical conclusion; yes, sir.

10Q Thank you. Now when you did these check points out

11on PIB, Mike Chapel worked 'em, didn't he?

12A No, sir. He worked the first one.

13Q He worked the first one?

14A Yes, sir.

15Q And did y'all receive any information out of that?

16A Yes, sir.

17Q Now --

18A But not -- not from Officer Chapel.

19Q But you did receive information from him?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q And the way those basically work are -- is that

22y'all had officers lining the road to stop 'em with the lights

23going. And they would stop the cars and you would move up and

24they shine a light in your car and they stick their head in

25and say did you happen to be coming by here on April the 15th?

- 47 -

1A Yes, sir.

2Q And on about -- between 8:30 and 10:30?

3A Yes, sir.

4Q And that was right there in front of the muffler

5shop?

6A Yes, sir.

7Q And Officer Chapel worked that?

8A The first night; yes, sir.

9Q The first time; okay. And this was after he had

10already reported to you at one -- approximately 1:50 that he

11had had contact with Ms. Thompson?

12A Yes, sir.

13Q Now Officer Chapel's normal working day started

14when?

15A He works three to eleven.

16Q So he called you prior to his shift?

17A Yes, sir.

18Q I want to go through a few of the things in the

19Search Warrant Affidavit and compare 'em to the summary, do

20you have that with you?

21A No, sir.

22Q Let me hand you what's been marked as Defendant's

23Exhibit Number 1. Can you identify that?

24A Yes, sir.

25Q For the record, would that be the Search Warrant,

- 48 -

1the return, together with the affidavit for Search Warrant at

293X31?

3A Yes, sir.

4Q And that has attached to it Attachment A, which

5consists of approximately four pages; is that correct?

6A Yes, sir.

7Q Did you assist in the preparation on the four pages

8of Attachment A?

9A Yes, sir.

10Q Did Officer Latty also -- Sergeant Latty, excuse

11me, also participate in that?

12A No, sir. Not that I recall.

13Q And who swore to the contents of the affidavit?

14A I did.

15Q So Attachment A is your total as you said, on the

1624th, the way you have the evidence; is that correct?

17A Our total case?

18Q No, sir. At that time. Not your total case. The

19way, when you prepared Attachment A, that was all the

20information you had on April the 24th?

21A No, sir. I don't think that's all the information

22we had, but that's the information we put in that statement.

23Q All right. Did you supply any information in an

24oral manner to the Magistrate that's not contained in --

25MR. PORTER: Your Honor, I'm going to object to the

- 49 -

1inquiry into the four corners of the Search Warrant. This

2is neither the forum nor the time for a challenge for this

3affidavit. Now the affidavit's been tendered for the

4Court's consideration and can be read by the Court as

5evidence. But to challenge that and the four corners of

6the document, this is not a motion to suppress. This

7Court does not have the jurisdiction to go into the

8contents of the affidavit at this hearing.

9MR. BRITT: I have not filed a motion to suppress

10and I'm not attempting to go into the four corners of the

11affidavit to test the constitutionality of that. As I

12prefaced my remarks to Sergeant Burnette, in that -- in

13comparing the Attachment A to the summary that the State

14has submitted here today, is what I wish to do. Certain

15portions of the Attachment A, as to the summary that

16have -- that was provided to me prior to the testimony is

17what I wish to do.

18MR. PORTER: Your Honor --

19THE COURT: What has that got to do with probable

20cause?

21MR. BRITT: Well they're both -- I want to compare

22what he has said these witnesses said today, versus what

23they've said, what he's testified to today in summary.

24THE COURT: Okay. I'll allow the question.

25 BY MR. BRITT: (Resuming)

- 50 -

1Q Sergeant Burnette, would you turn to the second

2page^ the second complete paragraph from the bottom where it

3says investigators received a statement from, and leaving out

4the man's name?

5A The first completed paragraph; is that correct?

6Q Sir?

7A The first completed paragraph?

8Q No -- no. From the bottom. Investigators received

9a statement from, who stated that on April 15th.

10A Yes, sir.

11Q Okay. Now if you would compare, for comparison

12purposes, that would be witness number twenty on the list that

13we've identified; is that correct. Sergeant Burnette -- so

14we'll all be on the same book and page number?

15A Yes, sir.

16Q And that's found on the bottom W-20 of the second

17page of the summary that you have prepared and that you are

18testifying to, here from, today; is that correct -- the bottom

19of the second page?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q All right. Now this witness number twenty stated

22that he left Duluth at approximately 2140 hours; is that

23correct?

24A Yes, sir.

25Q And it took him approximately ten to fifteen

- 51 -

1minutes to arrive at the muffler location?

2A Yes, sir.

3Q So that would have placed him there at a time

4between 2150 and 2155?

5A Yes, sir.

6Q And he said he observed someone getting a ticket?

7A Yes, sir.

8Q Is that correct. Now was the blue light on?

9A Yes, sir.

10Q And where was the car located in the driveway?

11A As I recall his statement, it -- he indicated to

12the Sergeant -- Lieutenant Latty the area. He was on the

13scene. He came through the road check.

14Q Okay.

15A And Lieutenant Latty asked him exactly where the

16car was located. He indicated the area where the victim's car

17had been.

18Q So would the car, the patrol car -- was it located

19directly behind the vehicle?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q And the light was shining up toward the building,

22away from the roadway?

23A Yes, sir.

24Q And the blue lights were activated?

25A Yes, sir.

- 52 -

1Q Okay. Now if you will turn to the third page, the

2first full paragraph, the husband and wife of the Search

3Warrant Affidavit, which are witnesses seventeen and eighteen;

4is that correct?

5A It's brother and sister; yes, sir.

6Q Excuse me, brother and sister. Those are witnesses

7seventeen and eighteen on the summary that you have provided

8to me?

9A Yes, sir.

10Q And they saw the -- a Gwinnett County police car

11sitting in the parking lot of the muffler shop at

12approximately 2142; is that correct?

13A As I read their statements, I understand it to be

149:15; 9:00 to 9:15 -- 2142 to be 9:42.

15Q I understand that. That — the way you — what you

16have in your summary is, as to witness seventeen and eighteen

17is 9:00 to 9:15 saw a police car in front area of Gwinnco

18Muffler. That's witness number seventeen. Is that a fair

19representation of what you have down there. Sergeant Burnette?

20A Yes, sir.

21Q And witness number eighteen would be 9:00 to 9:15

22p.m. saw a police car in driveway facing out?

23A Yes, sir.

24Q Is that a fair representation of what you have

25written down there?

- 53 -

1A Yes, sir.

2Q All right. But in the search warrant affidavit you

3have a time different. Is that correct; 2142?

4A Yes, sir. That time is in error.

5Q In error?

6A Yes, sir. 2142 is.

7Q You're saying that's an error?

8A Yes, sir.

9Q On your part?

10A Yes, sir.

11Q Okay.

12A As I read the statement, it says 9:00 to 9:15 on

13the seventeen and eighteen.

14Q Okay. So that's an error on your -- an error of

15say thirty -- thirty minutes or so.

16A Yes, sir.

17Q Okay. And the vehicle had its headlights on. Now

18one witness says that the -- it's in the front area of Gwinnco

19Muffler. Where is that located?

20A At the end of the driveway.

21Q At the-end of the driveway?

22A Yes, sir. Where you pull up and pull into the bay

23areas.

24Q So you would pull all the way up into the driveway

25and sort of go back to the left?

- 54 -

1A Yes, sir.

2Q And then the bay, I believe there's two or three

3bays there; is that correct?

4A Yes, sir.

5Q And that's what the witness number seventeen

6identifies as the front; is that correct?

7A Yes, sir.

8Q And then witness number eighteen who's also in the

9same vehicle describes that, saw police car in driveway facing

10out?

11A Yes, sir. They're right -- obviously they're right

12there together; yes, sir.

13Q They're right there together. So you're saying

14that being the front area, as you've described up there, in

15front of the bay, is the same as being in the driveway facing

16out?

17A No. What I,'m saying is they're right there

18together. You go out of the front area and directly into the

19driveway.

20Q But these witnesses were together, weren't they?

21A Yes, sir. .-

22Q And these -witnesses, would you say that it would be

23fair to say, or to conclude, that the witnesses have placed

24the vehicle at two separate locations?

25A Two separate areas of the same location; yes, sir.

- 55 -

1Q Well all right that'd be --

2A Yes, sir.

3Q Two separate areas of the same location?

4A One says it's in -- in the front area in front of

5the building and the other one says it's up more towards the

6driveway.

7Q And these people are in the same vehicle,

8travelling down the same road, looking at the same car?

9A Yes, sir.

10Q Okay. And then the affidavit goes on to say that

11the police vehicle wasn't running radar because he had his

12radar detector activated and it didn't go off; is that

13correct?

14A That's right.

15Q Now it'd be a fair statement to say Sergeant

16Burnette, that even as far back as when you was patrolling --

17when you was running radar -- you didn't always have it on all

18the time, you'd flip it on on people; is that fair?

19A Yes, sir. The radar would be on and off at various

20times.

21Q So whether or not radar is activated, or somebody's

22radar detector goes off, doesn't mean someone is, or is not,

23running radar; is that correct?

24A That's true.

25Q Okay. Now let's go down to the next paragraph of

- 56 -

1the search warrant after the one we have just discussed. And

2I believe that that would be turning to witnesses number

3thirteen. Is that thirteen the only one listed on the witness

4list -- list that we have? Oh excuse me --

5A Thirteen and fourteen.

6Q -- thirteen and fourteen. I'm sorry I had my

7finger on it. Now witnesses number thirteen and fourteen saw

8a police car in the driveway with the dome light on -- excuse

9me, number thirteen -- witness thirteen, who were together in

10the same vehicle; is that correct?

11A Yes, sir.

12Q Saw a vehicle between 9:20 and 9:25 p.m. -- saw a

13Gwinnett County police car in the driveway facing PIB with the

14dome light on?

15A Yes, sir.

16Q All right. Now when they say dome light to you,

17I've two interpretations. One is the dome light on the

18inside. And then the other one maybe referring to the dome

19light on the outside of the vehicle, the blue light. Which

20one would you say is correct?

21A Inside.

22Q Inside; okay. And they saw a guy sitting in the

23police car?

24A Yes, sir.

25Q And then in the witness number fourteen, at

- 57 -

1approximately 9:30, witness number fourteen merely saw a

2Gwinnett County police car facing out, period?

3A Yes, sir.

4Q Okay. So in the affidavit here where you list both

5of these witnesses' names, it's sort of a summary and a

6compilation of what they both saw, but they both didn't see

7the same thing; is that fair?

8A Yes, sir. That'd be fair.

9Q And the times listed in the affidavit for the

10search warrant is 2120 to a 2130; is that correct?

11A Yes, sir.

12Q Which is 9:20 to 9:30?

13A Yes, sir.

14Q Okay. If you would go down to the next paragraph

15of the search warrant affidavit which is --

16A He's not listed.

17Q He's not listed on the witness list here today, is

18he?

19MR. PORTER: Your Honor, if I may. This witness

20list was provided at the request of the State. It is not

21intended to be a comprehensive witness list. We are not

22required to provide a comprehensive witness list until

23arraignment.

24To imply that there's anything sinister about

25this -- Mr. Britt has been provided with documents. He

- 58 -

1has the witnesses. There is no -- nothing sinister on the

2part of Investigator Burnette or the State. And to even

3imply that by his question is objectionable.

4The second objection I have is, we are now

5proceeding to wander through the search warrant affidavit

6without any showing of the impeachment that Mr. Britt

7wanted to show. He has now questioned that there are two

8witnesses who saw something inconsistent. That's never

9been denied. That was -- he has not shown a single

10inconsistency between summary and search warrant affidavit

11which was the purpose of this Court allowing him to go

12into these documents. We would object to any further

13fishing through the document without this showing of a

14inconsistency between what has been testified to and what

15has been to sworn to in the affidavit which was the

16purpose of being admitted.

17MR. BRITT: Judge, I don't believe to imply

18anything -- and Mr. Porter takes offense at the question,

19you know. I'm just saying he's not on the witness list.

20And as to the witnesses, they've given me a summary. And

21I had to fight like a dog to get this affidavit out of

22'em. And they give this to me today at 3:10, telling me

23they're going to give me this, if I would agree to a

24procedure where we don't identify the witnesses, which I

25did -- and they're going to give me the summary. And I

- 59 -

1think I'm entitled to compare one to the other for cross-

2examination purposes. And I'm not going -- if the

3Court -- I have skipped over a whole page, and I am

4picking out simply one -- I have one, two, two more

5paragraphs to go through. And the affidavit is much

6longer than that. So I'm not fishing through the

7affidavit as Mr. Porter says.

8THE COURT: Well of course there's no jury here

9today and I'm well aware that the State's not under any

10duty to provide a comprehensive or exhaustive witness list

11at a preliminary hearing. We're simply here to determine

12probable cause. If your purpose is to point out that the

13witnesses have made inconsistent statements, I'll allow

14you to do that. Of course, this is not a time to

15challenge the search warrant.

16MR. BRITT: I'm not attempting to.

17THE COURT: Whether the affidavit is sufficient,

18insufficient or whatever, I have no opinion on, or comment

19on. But I'll allow you to question this witness as to the

20witnesses' inconsistent statements. As between

21inconsistencies between a summary provided to you, and

22what's in the search warrant, I'm not interested in that,

23because the summary is not evidence. The only evidence

24I've heard is what this officer testified --

25MR. BRITT: But it's a summ -- it's just a summary

- 60 -

1of his testimony.

2THE COURT: Okay. So we'll simply, if you'll

3simply direct your cross-examination of the witnesses'

4conflicting statements.

5BY MR. BRITT: (Resuming)

6Q The witness that we're identifying in the paragraph

7I've directed your attention to on the search warrant

8affidavit, is not listed on your witness list; is that

9correct?

10A No, sir. However, there's a number of other

11witnesses that are not listed on their list.

12Q So let's call him witness twenty-nine. You want to

13add him there. Sergeant Burnette. Why don't you just take

14that out your pen and just add that to it. Have you got him

15added there?

16A Yes, sir.

17Q Okay. And you didn't testify to anything about

18what this officer — what this man said; is that correct?

19A No, sir.

20Q So there's not any summary -- contain any

21summarization on your summary, on witness number twenty-nine;

22is that correct?

23A No, sir.

24Q Witness number twenty-nine was travelling between

252030 and 2230; is that correct -- on Peachtree Industrial? Is

- 61 -

1that correct?

2A Yes, sir.

3Q And the headlights and the interior dome light were

4on; is that correct?

5A Yes, sir.

6Q Was there anything to you that causes you to

7remember whether or not the vehicle was facing in or out?

8A In his statement he says it was facing PIB.

9Q And this white male police officer was wearing a

10white T-shirt?

11A That's as he described it.

12Q He described it as a white T-shirt?

13A Yes, sir.

14Q Now would it be fair to say. Sergeant Burnette,

15that most of these people that are travelling Peachtree

16Industrial Boulevard on the night of April 15th, or whenever

17they were travelling on Peachtree Industrial Boulevard, would

18be travelling toward the Buford area from Duluth, Suwanee?

19A The majority of 'em; yes, sir.

20Q And would you consider -- what direction would you

21consider that to be in?

22A North.

23Q North. So you would be, for the purposes of our

24discussion, let's say that they would have been travelling

25north from Lex Gates' Service Station on PIB, or what used to

- 62 -

1be Lex Gates', the wife's running it now -- the Chevron --

2A Amoco.

3Q Amoco Station?

4A Yes, sir.

5Q All right. They would be travelling north towards

6Buford on PIB Boulevard?

7A Yes, sir.

8Q And that during this period of time, what would be

9the clear sight line of Gwinnco Muffler?

10A Travelling north, you've got those six-tenths of a

11mile visibility.

12Q Of the entire parking area?

13A Of the driveway and the parking area. Yes, sir.

14Q Okay. Six-tenths of a mile?

15A Approximately.

16Q Approximately. And have you driven that?

17A Yes, sir.

18Q And then immediately after you pass Gwinnco

19driveway, you're -- would it be fair to say that your

20visibility is, or your iline of sight is obliterated by tree

21line?

22A Not completely; no, sir.

23Q Okay. How far can you see Gwinnco coming south on

24PIB from Buford, back toward Lex Gates' Station?

25A Well you have another line of approximately six-

- 63 -

1tenths of a mile to the entrance to the driveway and partially

2of the driveway. You have a tree line that comes out along

3PIB, I would say before you could get to that, it's probably a

4tenths, two-tenths of a mile.

5Q How far is it from the intersection of PIB and

6Highway 20 to the driveway of Gwinnco Mufflers?

7A I don't know. It's six tenths of a mile from Alton

8Tucker to the driveway.

9Q And if I told you I measured it last night and

10there's another tenth of a mile in there between 20 and Alton

11Tucker, would that be about right?

12A Sure.

13Q Okay. So we're talking about seven-tenths of a

14mile?

15A Yes, sir.

16Q Now turning to the last paragraph on page three.

17The long paragraph of the search warrant affidavit. Those are

18witnesses twenty-one and twenty-two; is that correct?

19A Yes, sir.

20Q Witness number twenty-two stated that at about 9:45

21he observed a Gwinnett County police car with it's blue lights

22activated behind a four-door mid-sized car; is that correct?

23A Yes, sir.

24Q Okay. And in your summary here, you say that he

25saw the police car with a flashlight in his left hand bent

- 64 -

1over looking into the vehicle; is that correct? That's what

2your summary says on witness number twenty-one.

3A Yes, sir.

4Q And the affidavit says that he observed a policeman

5out of his car with a flashlight walking toward the other car;

6is that correct?

7A Yes, sir. I think you're, confusing your witnesses,

8Mr. Britt.

9Q Oh, he said he observed a policeman out of his car,

10with a flashlight, walking up toward the other car. Is that

11what the affidavit says?

12A Yes, sir. That's what the affidavit says.

13Q Okay. And then your summary says saw police

14officer with flashlight in left hand bent over looking into

15car. That's witness twenty-one, witness twenty-one --

16A Mr. Britt, both of those --

17Q Excuse me, witness twenty-two, you're correct --

18twenty-two.

19A Yes, sir.

20Q All right. Witness twenty-two in your summary said

21he saw a police officer with a flashlight but he didn't have

22his hat on?

23A Negative.

24Q When he passed him in the car --

25A Yes, sir.

- 65 -

1Q Later on. Is that correct?

2A Later on.

3Q Right. That's what I'm saying, later on.

4A Yes, sir.

5Q Okay. But in your summary, you don't say anything

6about him walking up toward the car?

7A Mr. Britt these -- this is just exactly that --

8Q Well it is your testi --

9A This is a summary.

10Q Your summary -- your testimony you hadn't said

11anything about the man walking up toward the car, have you?

12A Mr. Britt, the summary is just that. It's not the

13entire statement of the witness. The witness' statement may

14very well have seen -- said that he was, in fact, walking up

15to the car and bent over in the car.

16Q A summary's just enough of what you want to say

17without letting it all out of the bag; is that true, Mr.

18Burnette?

19MR. PORTER: Your Honor, I'm going to object to

20this. The officer has testified. To characterize it in

21that manner is objectionable and we would --

22MR. BRITT: Well the officer is attempting to be

23argumentative with me in that to explain of what his

24summary is. And I can take issue with what he deems a

25summary is and give him what I feel like his view of the

- 66 -

1summary is.

2THE COURT: Okay. Well again, I'm going to -- I'm

3going to sustain the objection as to the summary. I don't

4care what the summary says. You can ask him about what he

5recalls this witness saying or doesn't recall --

6MR. BRITT: But Your Honor he has testified --

7THE COURT: But as far as saying it's not --

8MR. BRITT: He has not testified to anything that

9he has not written down. He has gone witness twenty-two

10and he has given just that information -- comma, period --

11and that's it.

12THE COURT: And so are you saying because there's

13more information about --

14MR. BRITT: There's more information that --

15THE COURT: And the affidavit --

16MR. BRITT: Yes. There's more information in the

17affidavit that makes a great deal of difference here. And

18that's what I'm trying to nail down; as to what

19transpired, what this person did or did not see.

20THE COURT: Well you can ask him about that but

21don't -- don't comment on the officers.

22MR. BRITT: Well don't -- then I don't think the

23Court should allow him to comment back to me, I mean, you

24know --

25THE COURT: I'll instruct the witness, y'all don't

- 67 -

1argue with each other.

2MR. BRITT: Thank you.

3THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am.

4MR. BRITT: We've been doing it for years but I

5guess we can both use that instruction.

6BY MR. BRITT: (Resuming)

7Q The -- you have here that the witness twenty-two

8was walking up to the car with his flashlight in his hand; is

9that correct? It don't say which hand.

10A Now which are we on?

11Q He observed a policeman out of his car with a

12flashlight walking up toward the other car.

13A Are we on the affidavit?

14Q We're on the affidavit.

15A Yes, sir.

16Q He was wearing his rain gear and a hat with a clear

17type rain cover on it; is that correct?

18A Yes, sir.

19Q The officer is described as a white male, six-one,

20six-two; tall, medium-build?

21A Yes, sir.

22Q Would you say Mike Chapel is medium-build?

23A Well I wouldn't say he's medium-build. But I

24wouldn't say he's a fat guy like me either, Walt.

25Q Well saying -- let's put it like this Jack, you're

- 68 -

>„>

1a big fat guy and I'm a short fat guy; what's he?

2A Well he's a medium-size, well-built fellow, I

3reckon.

4Q He's a medium-size? How tall are you Jack?

5A Six-two.

6Q How tall is he?

7A Six-six.

8Q And you consider yourself to be large and fat but

9he's medium; is that correct, sir?

10A The build.

11Q He's medium-built?

12A He's certainly -- he's certainly considerably

13bigger, tall-wise.

14Q All right. But you say he's medium-build?

15A Well he's certainly not a fat guy, Walt.

16Q And that the officer was looking down into the

17driver's side. So you're -- they observed the officer walking

18up to the car -- let me just ask it like this: These -- these

19two witnesses that we're talking about here, say that they

20observed, while driving down Peachtree Industrial Boulevard, a

21man that they later identified as Mike Chapel, walking up to

22that police car -- out of the police car walking up to the

23car; is that correct?

24A Yes, sir.

25Q That they saw him bend over?

- 69 -

1A Yes, sir. That's what witness number twenty-one

2says.

3Q They saw him bend over --

4A Looking into the car.

5Q And then they were proceeding on down Peachtree

6Industrial Boulevard; is that correct?

7A That's correct.

8Q And this car is behind this other vehicle with it's

9blue lights on?

10A Yes, sir.

11Q And that after they lost sight of the car, that

12within six-tenths of a mile, whoever this person was, or

13whatever happened down there, this person gets in a police

14unit, turns around -- and would it be fair to say Jack, that

15you couldn't just turn around right there in that driveway

16'cause it's sort of narrow; isn't it?

17A Yes, sir.

18Q You'd have to go on up there to the bay area that

19we were talking about earlier; is that fair?

20A No. You could back out.

21Q You could back out. And that that vehicle caught

22up to them in six-tenths of a mile, at Alton Tucker

23Boulevard -- because if you turn to Petro Lane, you gotta turn

24there right on off of Alton Tucker Boulevard. Well, it's not

25Alton Tucker on that side but --

- 70 -

--•• . -«1

1A Yes, sir. But I don't know that I ever testified

2that he lost sight of him.

3Q They never lost sight of him?

4A I said I don't know that I testified -- you said --

5Q I'm saying --

6A -- they lost sight of it.

7Q Did they lose sight of him?

8A No, sir. According to them, this says the police

9car that they were watching when they went by. But according

10to them, my understanding is, they never lost sight of it.

11Q The whole time?

12A Not the police officer, but the car with blue

13lights.

14Q Okay. They never lost sight of it?

15A That's my understanding.

16Q In this whole period of time?

17A That's my understanding.

18Q And they identified this person?

19A Yes, sir.

20Q Getting out of their vehicle?

21A No, sir. They didn't identify --

22Q Walking toward?

23A They identified an officer --

24Q Walking toward?

25A White male. Walking toward, bent over in the

- 71 -

1vehicle.

2Q Walking toward it?

3A (Nodded head yes.)

4Q How long do you -- how long does it take to

5traverse this whole distance there?

6A Probably walk up there, bend over, turn around walk

7back to the car, in less than a minute, much less than a

8minute.

9Q How long does it take to traverse the sight

10distance, the six-tenths, the one point two?

11A I don't know.

12Q And they didn't hear no gunshots did they?

13A No, sir.

14MR. BRITT: I don't think I'd have anything else of

15this witness.

16Thank you. Sergeant.

17MR. PORTER: I have nothing further for this

18witness. Your Honor.. The State would rest.

19THE COURT: You can step down.

20(Whereupon the witness stepped down.)

21THE COURT: The State doesn't call any other

22witnesses?

23MR. PORTER: -No.

24THE COURT: Does the defense wish to present any

25evidence?

- 72 -

1MR. BRITT: I need some — a few -- could I have a

2few moments to confer with my client outside?

3THE COURT: Certainly. We'll take a five minute

4recess. It's 4:35, we'll be back at 4:40.

5(Whereupon a short recess was taken.)

6THE COURT: The State has rested. Mr. Britt, does

7defense intend to put up any evidence?

8MR. BRITT: The Defendant would call to the stand

9Eren Chapel.

10Whereupon,

11EREN CHAPEL

12was called as a witness by the Defense, and having been

13duly sworn was examined and testified as follows:

14(The witness responded "I do" to the oath.)

15DIRECT EXAMINATION:

16 BY MR- BRITT:

17Q State your name for the record, please?

18A Eren Chapel.

19Q And where do you reside, Ms. Chapel?

20A 244 Park Place Drive, Lawrenceville.

21Q And you are the wife of the accused, Michael H.

22 Chapel?

23A Yes.

24Q Now in relationship to the money — of the hundred

25 dollar bill that has been testified to here today by Mr.

- 73 -

1Burnette. During the period of mid-April 1993, did Mr. Chapel

2receive any money from any person?

3A Yes.

4Q And who was that person?

5A Jack Dudley.

6Q And who is Mr. Dudley?

7A He is a friend of ours that Mike has done some

8bodyguard service for. When I was waitressing at a restaurant

9he was a regular of the restaurant there.

10Q Now in this period of time did Mr. Dudley give to

11Mr. Chapel sixteen hundred dollars?

12A Yes.

13Q What was that for?

14A To invest in the gym and use as he saw fit.

15Q Now also during this period of time did there come

16a period of time when the -- certain members of the gym

17invested in to buy T-shirts?

18A Yes.

19Q Okay. Was Van Parker one of those individuals?

20A Yes.

21Q Did you write the other ones down at your home?

22A Yes.

23Q How did you come to have this information?

24A Mike had mentioned it to me when it was

25transpiring.

- 74 -

1Q Was Kenny Stephens one of these individuals?

2A Yes.

3Q Was Robert Soto one of these -- Socia one of these

4individuals?

5A Yes.

6Q And was Rob Johnson one of these individuals?

7A Yes.

8Q And was this for the purchase of T-shirts to be

9sold at the gym?

10A Yes.

11MR. BRITT: That'd be all the questions I have for

12this witness at this time.

13Thank you.

14THE COURT: Any cross-examination, Mr. Porter?

15CROSS-EXAMINATION

16BY MR- PORTER:

17Q Ms. Chapel how do you get hold of Jack Dudley?

18A I would -- how do I get a hold of him?

19Q Yeah. What's his address or his phone number?

20A He lives in Cumming. I don't recall his phone

21number right off hand, but I have it written down.

22MR. BRITT: The Defendant would be more than happy

23to provide that to the State on Monday morning.

24BY MR. PORTER: (Resuming)

25Q And what type of work did -- I'm confused here, now

- 75 -

1the bodyguard work Mr. Chapel was paid for, and when did that

2occur?

3A That's on and off. It's been several times for Mr.

4Dudley in the past.

5Q When was the most recent time to April the 16th and

6April 15th, prior to that?

7A I would imagine, the beginning of April to mid-

8April. I'm not sure on the time.

9Q I can understand that. And do you know what the

10rate of pay is?

11A It's different. Usually a hundred, two hundred,

12something, whatever Jack sees fit.

13Q Has that -- how often has that happened?

14A That I'm aware of, two or three times.

15Q Are you aware of the method of payment?

16A Yes.

17Q How has he been paid?

18A Jack always pays in hundred dollar bills.

19Q So on the nights that this would happen, on the

20days this would happen, your husband would come home with two,

21hundred dollar bills or a hundred dollar bill?

22A Yes.

23Q In payment for that?

24A Yes.

25Q And the nearest one that you can remember to April

- 76 -

1the 15th is sometime in the first -- did he do it on April the

215th?

3A Not that I'm aware of, no.

4Q Did he do it at any time prior to nine o'clock on

5the 16th, when he went to car wash?

6A Anytime prior to the 16th, could have been the

7beginning of April; correct? I would say yes to that

8question.

9Q And so then he would carry around this two hundred

10dollars all the time?

11A Who, Mike?

12Q Yeah.

13A I don't know. I don't check his pockets.

14Q But I mean he's your husband. Is it customary for

15him to carry around hundreds of dollars in his pocket at any

16given time?

17A Not hundreds. He might have one or two or three;

18yes.

19Q That's customary for him?

20A Yes.

21Q At any given time he'd have a hundred dollar bill

22or a --

23A Not at any given time. But it's not out of

24character.

25Q Now let me ask you about the T-shirts. How much

- 77 -

1did the T-shirts cost?

2A I don't know.

3Q Okay. And did you ever see the money that it --

4they didn't cost a hundred dollars a piece did they?

5A I don't know.

6Q And you didn't see any of the money that was

7collected for the T-shirts did you?

8A No.

9Q So you don't know or get a name of the people who

10bought T-shirts and there were four or five --

11A Correct.

12Q Were there six hundred dollars worth of T-shirts

13pre-purchased?

14A I don't know. My understanding was -- he would --

15they invested the money for us to purchase the T-shirts to

16sell at the gym.

17Q But you don't know any details of that?

18A No.

19MR. PORTER: That's all the questions I have.

20REDIRECT EXAMINATION

21BY MR. BRITT:

22Q But during this period of time Mr. Chapel was given

23a large sum of money, approximately sixteen hundred dollars by

24Mr. Dudley that you're aware of?

25A Definitely.

- 78 -

1Q And that was for investment in the gym?

2A Yes.

3MR. BRITT: That'd be all the questions I have.

4Thank you ma'am.

5THE COURT: Any further recross, Mr. Porter?

6MR. PORTER: No, Your Honor. We have no questions.

7THE COURT: You can step down. Thank you.

8(Whereupon the witness stepped down.)

9THE COURT: Any other witnesses?

10MR. BRITT: No ma'am. We would tender into

11evidence -- we've agreed to substitute the copy of

12Defendant's Exhibit Number 1.

13THE COURT: Make sure that all the pages are

14copied. I know there were some front and back. Just make

15sure those are the same.

16MR. BRITT: Yeah. There's just one back -- just

17one back.

18THE COURT: Defendant's Exhibit 1 has been

19tendered, any objection by the State?

20MR. PORTER: No, Your Honor, we have no objection

21to the substitution of copies.

22THE COURT: Okay. Defendant's Exhibit 1, a

23substituted copy will be admitted into evidence.

24(Whereupon a copy Defendant's Exhibit Number 1 was

25admitted into evidence.)

- 79 -

1MR. BRITT: With the tendering and admissions of

2Defendant's Exhibit Number 1, we would not seek to put up

3any other evidence at this time.

4THE COURT: Defense would rest. Is there closing

5arguments?

6MR. PORTER: Your Honor, we'd waive closing --

7waive opening and reserve the right to close.

8THE COURT: Mr. Britt?

9MR. BRITT: Your Honor, under the Rules, the Court

10is merely here to determine what probable cause is. I've

11often struggled with what probable cause is, as to what

12the standard is and a -- it's not beyond a reasonable

13doubt. It's not by a preponderance of the evidence. It's

14just enough where you think that the Grand Jury ought to

15hear this.

16I would say to the Court that the State's case is

17merely circumstantial evidence; nothing more. There is no

18direct evidence. It's circumstantial evidence in and of

19itself. The three major pieces of evidence, of direct

20evidence that would be linking Mike Chapel to anything,

21are money, gun and a clear rain hat. There's not any of

22'em. After that, all you have is testimony of people who

23saw, or may have seen, or looked at the same thing, and

24saw different things.

25I would submit to the Court that merely based upon

- 80 -

1circumstantial evidence, that there may be sufficient

2evidence to bind it over to a Grand Jury. And I'm not

3going to sit here and insult the intelligence of the Court

4by saying that the State has not made standard. But I

5would point out to the Court that I don't think that there

6has been sufficient evidence to bind the case over for a

7malice murder. But there may be sufficient evidence to

8bind the case over with on a felony murder*. If taking the

9circumstantial evidence at it's best, if you can take this

10circumstantial evidence at anything.

11THE COURT: Mr. Porter?

12MR. PORTER: Your Honor, by conceding the felony

13murder, Mr. Britt must also concede the armed robbery.

14And therefore I'll restrict my arguments to the malice

15murder.

16In this case we know that Emogene Thompson left her

17house between 9:45 and 9:50 on the night of the 13th --

18April the 15th on her way to work as was her custom. We

19know from the witnesses that between 9:45 and 10:00, at

20least seven witnesses observed a Gwinnett County police

21car with it's blue -- excuse me, three witnesses saw a

22Gwinnett County police car with its blue lights on behind

23a brown domestic sedan which was consistent with the car

24that was driven by Emogene Thompson.

25Two of those witnesses observed a vehicle with a

- 81 -

1police officer in a raincoat outside of that car

2approaching or at the brown domestic sedan. Never losing

3sight of that car as they went northbound on PIB, at the

4traffic light where they were stopped at Alton Tucker

5Boulevard, the police car pulled beside them. And at an

6intersection the passenger turned to the side and

7recognized this Defendant, Mike Chapel, seated in the

8police car. He recognized him to the extent that he was

9able to identify him in a photographic lineup and state

10that's the man who was in the car except that he doesn't

11have a mustache now. And the photograph in the lineup was

12of Mike Chapel with a mustache.

13So at the critical time that we know that this

14murder occurred, which was between 9:50 and 10:00 on the

15night of April the 15th, the person that we have, not

16close to the scene, not within a mile of the scene, but at

17the scene is Mike Chapel.

18Circumstantial evidence has to exclude every other

19reasonable possibility except that of guilt. And in this

20case, the State would say that the case is based on

21circumstantial evidence. But circumstantial evidence is

22in our life every day. And the Court has made it's own

23argument about circumstantial evidence in the cases that

24it's tried. And I won't bother to repeat those arguments.

25But in this case, what do we have? We have this officer

- 82 -

1or this person at the scene, at the time of the homicide.

2We have a connection.

3By this officer's own testimony, he responded to

4the burglary on April the 6th at the victim's house. He

5was aware that she was in the habit, and was carrying six

6thousand dollars in cash. He was in financial trouble.

7The IRS had called him. They were going to audit him.

8His power was almost off. Now we've heard the testimony

9of his wife and I don't doubt that testimony. But somehow

10it seems somewhat incongruous that a man who can't keep

11his lights on is going around paying for car washes with

12hundred dollar bills unless he's just come into a lot of

13hundred dollar bills. And he did that night. He came

14into seven thousand dollars worth. Then we have the T-

15shirts being paid for with hundred dollar bills. All of

16the known denominations of the money that was taken that

17night, that we know is gone because the purse is gone.

18Your Honor, what we have here is a simple case that

19this officer left the precinct at 9:30 and went to the

20Gwinnco Muffler where he had a deter -- predetermined to

21meet with this victim -- by the testimony of the other

22witnesses, who said that the victim stated to them that

23she was going to meet Officer Mike that night. He met her

24there or pulled her over there and killed her and he took

25her money. And certainly the case is circumstantial. But

- 83 -

1it's certainly enough to go to the Grand Jury. And it's

2certainly enough to go forth.

3And Your Honor, I would not discount at this point

4the evidence that this officer, on Friday morning, drives

5to Lawrenceville to clean a police vehicle when he's not

6on duty and he's not at work. He drives it there. And in

7that police vehicle last night, blood was discovered on

8the seat. Your Honor, we believe that there's enough to

9bind over on all charges. And we would ask that the

10charges be bound over.

11THE COURT: As counsel knows, we're simply here to

12determine probable cause as Mr. Britt said. Sometimes

13probable cause is hard to get a hand on. The law tells me

14that probable cause is, are there enough facts to cause a

15reasonable person to believe that the crime charged and

16the warrant was committed by the person charged.

17As both sides agree, this is a circumstantial case.

18And based on what I've heard. I do find probable cause to

19bind the case over on Warrant Number 1677 charging Michael

20Harold Chapel with the offense of malice murder; and

21Warrant Number 93W 1678 charging Michael H. Chapel with

22the offense of Felony Murder; and Warrant Number 93W 1679

23charging Michael H. Chapel with the offense of armed

24robbery. The case will be bound over. This is a Superior

25Court only bond.

- 84 -

1 MR. PORTER: And the application's already been

2 filed.

3 THE COURT: That'll be taken up --

4 MR. BRITT: It's set for Thursday at nine --

5 MR. PORTER: Ten o'clock.

6 MR. BRITT: Ten o'clock.

7 THE COURT: That'll be taken up in Superior Court.

8 That'll be all in the case. You're excused.

9 (Whereupon the matter was concluded at 5:00 p.m.)

10

- 85 -

STATE'S EXHIBIT

NO. 1

NUMBERED LIST OF WITNESSES

State's Exhibit 1

THE REMAINING PAGES ARE COPIES OF THE SEARCH WARRANT EXHIBITS AND BEAR SEVERAL SIGNATURES THAT DO NOT COPY TO AN OCR CONVERSION.

^ ~ - y;5 A C)/ .

i ' .

i • '

; . i

; ' ^_ i

' G!-:01;CTA. C.^' I .\'N1-:TT COUNTY. l '

; TO ANY l.Awri.U. 0!-1--ICF-R TO EXECUTE A-'.D RETURN: J

j AFFIDAVIT HAVING BEEN MAOE BEFORE ME BY: I

Th:;*. h':' i>.is r-c<t-.oti t.o be 1 ieve that on the person of and that on the }

I ;•> :-<-i;i i -.•'•. '-: n o'-• i > .'>s r ho premises of y.'L'-'.e Ch,--;--:^. 2/'••'• Pork Place Dr., Lawrencevi Ie , ;

; -1 rinc L .. ( rt. ;• > v , (..ci.) i >: l.: . '.

[ !

i

j

I

r^T^^nn^T?^ • i

pSi.ll^UM.llu,l l

^ l-i .,,,....^ U| I

. if.; ;-...^ ^; :^- ^ I

I?; - ^:( I

ijljC^^SDTr^:^ j

'--""--"•"""""'""" 1

There is n-o^.. being concealed certain property, namely clear police cap cover, |

--•ello^ rzincoac, flashlight, large suras c: Eonev. .35 cai. Charcer Arcis or R.G. revolver |

oarcs anc conponencs cheroot, seBi-^-adcu;: er , pu-5= £nd convenes including I.D. of j

^EOgenc- Thompson. Hand-riLcen noces of ?;1. Chap^i percaining co burglary of Thompson j

residence-. -. -. .. |

Which are/is Evidence and fruics of che cric=; of Murder and Arcsed Robbery. ^

! i

and as I am satisfied that there is probable cause to believe that I

the property so described is being concealed on the person and j

premises above described and that the foregoing grounds for I

application for issuance of the Search "-arrant exit. You are j

hereby commanded to search forthwith the person and premises named 1

for the property specified, and -making the search (in the day time)

(at any time in the day or night) and i. :' the property be found ,

there to seize it, leaving a copy of this -----rrant and a receipt for j

the property taken, ana prepare a-Tittcp. i .-'.•--en to ry of the property j

seized and return tills warrant and brio.^ the property before me |

•-ithin ten (10) days of this date, as rcc---: red by ia^-- :

ii This ^^-^day or ^^Jl 19 fj at ^^DO o'clock. - -^

' ^ ^ !

! ^/A^y/Mi-i-^' Lf-e^,^ '

XJUDGE7

i •,a^^M±..-.--Z^^'Ht^J—^^—

__________________^? ___ _ ______

^3 K^' . • ••'

RETURN ;?

I received the attached Search Warrant on __/IT^^ '2^

l9 ^3 <^d have executed it as follows: ~——

i

"I

, on M)L Z^-Vt 1973 at 7:5^ o'clock _A_. M. i|

I searched the £L£lLS^n Tind- premises described in the warrant, and I ^|

[ left a copy of the warrant with /^T Z^> C/h~)Q -J ' |

together with a receipt for the items seized. ———'

' ' 1 '

.-•-..:; .I

THE FOLLOWING IS AN INVENTORY OF PROPERTY TAKEN PURSUANT TO THE - - "'^N

WARRANT: This inventory was made in the presence of <7c/^~^7^//Cf ./< ^ -^^l

————————and I swear that this is a true and detailed account of all ^..l

the property taken by me on the warrant. ' [

-^ - ' '•1

(<<9L'A/7Y /s^w ^^ift^rr .//I - /// i

/2L /te6^ OF ^ ^. ^^^^^^^——

\^ ,/ \y /

^~) ^ /fl r/ /^/^

Sworn to and subscribed before me this ^— Q dav of W?l4' ^^v^

<^

f T I T\/^ C" L^-^ ' I

»-' U JL/VJ t-» '.'.'-, I

'^y^fcjJ^^^ ^ ,L,^ Page H.T..Jy_flf ^ ;:-

88 ^

Q^ ^\

AFFIDAVIT FOR SEARCH WARRANT

GEORGIA. GWINNETT COUNTY.

The undersigned being duly sworn deposes and says:

That he has reason to believe that on the person of and on the

premises known as: 244 Park Place Dr., Lawrenceville, Gwinnett County, Georgia*

the premises of Mike Chapel.

"There is now being concealed certain property, namely clear police cap

' cover, yellow raincoat, flashlight, large sums of money, .38 cal. Charter Arms or

R.G.'revolver parts and components thereof, semi-wadcutter, purse and content, including

I.D. of Emogene Thompson. Handwritten notes of Pel. Chapel pertaining to burglary

of Thompson residence.

Which are/is evidence and fruits of the crimes of Murder and Armed Robbery.

And that the facts tending to establish the foregoing grounds for

issuance of Search Warrant are listed on Attachment A.

Deponent shows that based on the above and foregoing facts and

information he has probable cause to believe that the aforesaid

property is concealed upon the aforesaid (premises) (persons}

(vehicle) and is subject to seizure and makes the Affidavit so that

a search warrant may issue for the aforesaid (premises) (persons)

(vehicle).

TITLE AND SIGNATURE OF OFFICER

Sworn to and subscribed before me this

^"^ of ^ : ^ 19^ - ^^."-

/ ^

}Y / i^ j ^

//^ tff_,U ^^^L^-7

7JUDGE;~ /

•5ai^teliAM^------~"^>,. «._t_ prtte.^.ef^L

.-._• U.«^—— ' "-^ • ' '•'"'.•mi-.^.i.. -. a VAf/t Hg^.-^.S^^a.^.QT-.——>—n-rrf

fe ^89

Q ^ ^ ^ (

Attachment A

On Friday, April 15, 1993, at approximately 8:22 a.m., Gwinnett

County Police Uniform Units responded to a Person Dead call at

1010 Peachtree Industrial Blvd., Sugar Hill, Georgia. Upon their

arrival, they found Emogene Bertha Thompson dead of gunshot wounds

to the head. Investigators were called to the location and a

homicide investigation was begun.

Lt. J. W. Latty, Inv. A. L. Ervin, and Inv. Jack Burnette responded

to the scene. Investigators observed that Ms. Thompson was sitting

on the driver's side of her Lincoln, driver window down, ignition

on, headlights off, doors locked, seatbelt on, with a work order

from Wade Ford laying in her lap. Investigators observed the

passenger side front tire flat. Investigators learned from Michael

Thompson that his mother was carrying approximately $6,000 in her

purse, which was missing. Michael Thompson told investigators of

a burglary at his residence about a month earlier in which

approximately S8,000 was taken. Michael Thompson told

investigators the incident was reported to the Gwinnett County

Police.

Inv. Burnette interviewed Thomas Morris, who told him that on the

evening before he had been by the location at 9:00 p.m. and didn't

see the car. At approximately 10:30 A.m. he came back by and the

car- was sitting in the driveway. '73^

At 2:11 p.m. Inv. Burnette was told by Crime Scene Technician Mary

Ann White that one projectile had been recovered and the sidewall

of the tire had been cut.

Investigators were able to determine the following. On April 3,

1993, at approximately 3:04 p.m., Ptl. Chapel was dispatched to a

burglary call at the Thompson residence. Ptl. Chapel arrived at

3:08 p.m. and returned in service at 3:49 p.m. some 41 minutes

later. Ptl. Chapel did not write a report or note the call on his

Iog sheet.

Inv. Tracy Barnhart interviewed Marsha Smith, who among other

things, told her that Emogene Thompson had talked with her on the

previous Tuesday or Wednesday saying how excited she was because

Pt.1. Chapel had called saying he had found a $100 bill and wrapper

and that her son and Dennis would be brought in for questioning

soon or would be in jail.

Investigators interviewed Virginia Chance, who stated that she had

worked with the victim for the past two years at Ciba Vision and

was a good friend and confidante. Ms. Chance states that on

Friday, April 16, 1993, at 0100 hours, she noticed that the victim

was not at work. At 0500 hours, Ms. Chance obtained the victim's

check in order to deliver it to her. Ms. Chance left work at 0700

hours and at 0805 hours she saw the victim's car at Gwinnco Muffler

Shop in Sugar Hill. Ms. Chance pulled in behind the car,

identified it as the victim's, didn't see anyone around it, and

- - •• ,_ /

^^^Mi^Ay^^^ ^._L ^ N.. ^ of ^ . .

_______ __________9 0 __ _ ________.

^ ^ s /

arrived home at 0845 hours. Ms. Chance went to the victim's house

where she advised her son that the victim's car was at the muffler

shop .

Investigators obtained a statement from Delores Burrell, another

friend of the victim. Ms. Burrell stated that she had spoken with

the victim on Thursday night, April 15, 1993, prior to the victim

leaving for work. Ms. Burrell spoke with the victim about the

missing money and about Officer Chapel who had investigated the

case. The victim advised Ms. Burrell that the officer had

recovered $400 of the missing money, that the money had been sent

somewhere to be checked, and that the victim was waiting on a call

from the officer in order to compare the serial numbers of the

money. Ms. Burrell was suspicious and asked the victim to call her

if the officer spoke with her again that night. This was just

prior to the victim's murder.

At. approximately 10:30 a.m., Inv. Burnette requested that records

checks be made for the burglary report but the only one found was

l: dated over a year prior. No current burglary report was found.

Investigators and crime scene technicians completed processing the

scone.

At approximately 1:50 p.m., Inv. Burnette was contacted at

headquarters by Capt. L. 0. Cantrell, who told him Pti. Mike Chapel

had something to tell him. Pti. Chapel told Inv. Burnette that he

had responded to the Thompson residence about a week to a week and

a half prior on a burglary call. Pti. Chapel described the

incident as a "bullshit" call saying that Emogene Thompson had

reported approximately half of $ 14,000 missing. Pti. Chapel told

f n\-. Burnette that he felt her son had taken the .money and had

spoken with him. Inv. Burnette advised Pti. Chapel that he needed

a supplemental report detailing his involvement in this case.

At approximately 2:10 p.m., Inv. Burnette attended the postmortem

examination and autopsy of Emogene Thompson performed by Dr. Brian

Frist. Examination revealed two gunshot wounds to the head. Dr.

Frist told investigators that he saw no evidence of a struggle, no

defense wounds and no injuries from the neck down.

Investigators received a statement from Harlan Preston, who stated

that on April 15, 1993, he left work from Duluth at 2140 hours. He

drove approximately 10 to 15 minutes before reaching Gwinnco

Muffler. There he observed "someone getting a ticket". He noticed

that the patrol car had a blue light on the roof that went all the

way across the width of the roof and that the vehicle stopped was

in the driveway of the muffler shop.

Investigators spoke with William A. Hutchins, who stated that on

April 15, 1993, between 2100 and 2200 hours he heard two loud shots

from his residence on Second Avenue in Sugar Hill.

Investigators again spoke with Delores Burrell, who stated that the

victim was keeping her money on her person or close b_y_. The victim

-^^^(^^^^ W...J—— P^ ^j2^oLL——

^'m9i

9 S '^ '^ /

also told Ms. Burrell that the officer had hidden from her on at

least one occasion at the car wash on Ga. 20 and then followed her

toward the Suwanee area as she was enroute to work.

Investigators spoke with Ed and Jennifer Schmanski, who stated they

observed a Gwinnett County police car sitting in the parking lot of

Gwinnco Muffler at approximately 2142 hours on April 15, 1993, the

vehicle had its headlights on and was not running radar because Mr.

Schmanski had his radar detector activated.

Investigators spoke with Mary Ann Johnsa and Stacy Turner who each

stated they had observed a Gwinnett County police car sitting in

the driveway of Gwinnco Muffler with the headlights and dome light

on with a guy sitting inside the police car, which was facing

Peachtree Industrial Blvd. This was on April 15, 1993, between

2120 and 2130 hours.

Investigators spoke with Dr. Robert Brusie, who stated he was

travelling northbound on PIB sometime between 2030 and 2230 hours

when he observed a Gwinnett County police car parked in the

driveway of Gwinnco Muffler facing PIB. The headlights and

interior dome light were on and Dr. Brusie observed a white male

police officer inside wearing what is described as a white T-shirt.

On April 21, 1993, following a road check at the crime scene, Sgt.

Cline had an informal conversation with Officer Chapel at the

Northside Precinct. During this conversation, Officer Chapel

showed Sgt. Cline a legal pad containing notes of investigations

which he had conducted. On the top page, Officer Chapel showed

Sgt. Cline the name "Dennis Shelton" and stated that he had

encountered Shelton in Rest Haven on a previous night. During this

conversation, Sgt. Ciine observed the tag number "NAD-917" to be

written on this page. This tag number is that of which was

displayed on the vehicle in which the victim was murdered.

On April 23, 1993, at 1309 hours, a statement was obtained from

Carl Kautter, the owner of S.P. & B. Mercedes Automotive located in

Buford. Mr. Kautter stated that on April 15, 1993, at

approximately 2145 hours, he observed a Gwinnett County police car

with its bluelights activated behind a 4-door, mid-sized car in the

driveway of Gwinnco Mufflers near the beginning of the four-lane

section of Peachtree Industrial Blvd. in Sugar Hill. He observed

a policeman out of his car with a flashlight walking up toward the

other car. The officer was wearing rain gear and a hat with a

clear-type rain cover on it. The officer is further described as

a white male, 6'1" to 6'2" tall, medium build. The officer was

looking down into the driver's side left window of the vehicle. As

Mr. Kautter continued north on PIB, he observed the police car

approaching him from the rear. As the police car passed on his

right, Mr. Kautter observed that he had dark hair. The police car

appeared indecisive before continuing north on PIB and turning

right on the next road north of Ga. 20. At 1830 hours, Mr. Kautter

was shown a photographic line-up of eight color photographs of

uniformed police officers of the Gwinnett County Police Department.

fiY^^"^.^^"'^^'•''''''•'' ""••••- • - ,

^\ .^llxAffi^^ ^"t"-^ Page No. ^ cfJ'L--

Q 9>

9jy fi^l

^ ^ '^^/

Mr. Kautter read the photo line-up affidavit and then selected

Photograph No. 3, the photo of Officer M. Chapel.

On April 23, 1993, at 1840 hours, Mr. Paul Omodt was interviewed by

Captain R. L. Davis. Mr. Omodt stated that he was with Mr. Kautter

and that. he further observed that the Gwinnett County police car

was of the "bubble-type" similar to a Crown Victoria or Chevy

Caprice.

Investigation reveals that on the night of the murder, April 15.

1993, Pti. Chapel was working and was assigned to the area where

The murder occurred during those times. The projectiles recovered

in the victim's automobile were sent to the Georgia State Crime

Laboratory who reported them to having been fired from a Charter

Arms or RG .38 cal . revolver. The projectiles were also described

as semi-wadcutter ammunition.

Investigation reveals that Pti. Chapel drives a 1992 Ford Crown

Victoria with a blue stripe and gold reflective trim. County Unit

ii No . 1 97 .

Affiant prays for the issuance of this search warrant based on the

probable cause set forth in this Affidavit for the crimes of Murder

and Armed Robbery so that. they may be properly identified and

se i zed.

A f f i an l : _____________________

—i '- r'^

Sworn t.o and subscribed before me on this ^^^ 'day o f April, 1993.

•'"^e: py^^^L-O. ^.

• ^^.^l ^^ylXA^;'''^'-^t»''M««..Z-.L.P^»'».——l——"-1———

93

CERTIFICATE

STATE OF GEORGIA

COUNTY OF GWINNETT

I, Eileen J. Spiers, Certified Court Reporter,

hereby certify the foregoing pages 1 through 93 of the

transcript are a true, correct and complete record of the

^ proceedings. I further certify that I am not a relative,

employee or counsel of any of the parties; nor am I a relative

or in the regular employment of such counsel; nor am I in any

way interested in the result of aforesaid case; and that the

original transcript and State's Exhibit No. 1 under seal,

shall be filed with the Court.

WITNESS my hand and seal this the 5th day of May,

1993 .

„ Jbib^(^^ijM)_____

EILEEN J. S^ERSjjcCRB-1650

My commission expires March 31, 1994

CO(PV

- 94 -

---

* This was a big mistake on Walt Britt’s part, His statement that Porter could then interpret as an admission allowed Chapel to be bound over.