Hank Skinner Part V: The Trial

I recall from my younger days a single-panel cartoon of two scientists standing before a large chalkboard. I could tell they were scientists because they wore white lab coats and because the large chalkboard was almost completely filled with complex equations, math, and greek symbols. There was one portion of the board, however, not covered with equations. Instead, that small portion read: "And then a miracle happens."

One scientist is pointing at those words and telling the other scientist: "I think you need a little more detail right there."

When I studied the Hank Skinner trial, that cartoon came to mind. I envisioned the prosecution case as the big chalkboard filled with equations. The defense strategy was represented by reliance on a miracle, and the jury by the one scientist telling the other, in effect: "That's not going to cut it."

The prosecution presented a formidable case. Hank Skinner was absolutely in the room when Twila Busby was being murdered: he had her blood on his shirt and his pants. He was also near Elwin Caler when Elwin was being stabbed. He had Elwin's blood on his pants.

Hank also had a cut on his hand, an unintentional wound, it claimed, resulting from striking bone as he stabbed Randy Busby to death. The abrupt stop caused his hand to slip down the knife.

Hank's bloody handprint was found on the doorway to Randy's bedroom, left there after he murdered Randy.

Hank's bloody handprints were found on the back door, left there as he made his escape.

After murdering Twila, Elwin, and Randy, Hank made his way to the home of Andrea Reed, his earlier AA sponsor. There he forced his way into her home and kept her hostage for more than three hours. He admitted to the killing and threatened to kill Andrea herself if she tried to contact the police.

The police located Hank there some three hours later, hiding in a closet.

Hank's escape to Andrea's home was proof that he was not too drunk to kill. After all, Hank found his own way to Andrea's home, entered there without her knowledge, cleaned his own wound, attempted to stitch up his own wound, warned Andrea against notifying the police, and had the presence of mind to hide as the police narrowed their perimeter about him. He even admitted to the killing. Those were not the actions of an innocent person.

Hank's defense was that Hank was indeed at the murder scene, but incapacitated. His blood alcohol level was 0.21, his codeine level was three times that of a normal therapeutic dose. He simply couldn't have killed them, despite the testimony of Andrea Reed that Hank was quite capable of tasks such as breaking and entering, dressing self-inflicted wounds, holding people hostage, and hiding from the police.

Hank had also in the past injured his hand, the same hand he would have used to wield the axe handle and the knives. Testing showed that Hank had lost considerable gripping power in that hand.

Hank must have cut himself on glass from the broken light fixture when he fell down as he staggered from the house. That's how the blood must have come to be on his clothes. He was staggering out of the house, fell down, cut his hand, and got blood on his clothes.

And finally for Comer's ace in the hole. Why didn't the police test all the DNA? If the police were so confident of Hank's guilt, why didn't they test all of the DNA?

To which the jury answered: "Because you didn't force them to do so, because you knew what the answer would be."

Guilty of murder in the first degree. Penalty set as death by lethal injection.

Coming soon in Part VI of the series: Eyewitness Testimony.

Hank Skinner Part VI: Eyewitness Testimony

Responding to what I have written so far, one reader commented: “If he did dress his wound, that takes away any doubt of his lucidity. And why would Andrea lie? After that read, he looks even more guilty.”

Welcome to the world of the juror. It’s a world in which opponents of an ultimate-stakes face-off spoonfeed you morsels of well-massaged information, a world of appetizers but no main course, a world of thirteen-line sonnets. You are one of the twelve people least-informed about the tragedy just laid bare before you. You are nonetheless expected to assume lead role for the final act.

Though eyewitnesses tend to be held in high-regard by jurors, they are responsible for more than 75% of all wrongful convictions. Recent studies by The Innocence Project and numerous other organizations simply re-enforce a phenomenon well-documented more than a century ago. Hugo Munsterberg  wrote of the issue in his 1907 work “On the Witness Stand.”

It is a wise juror that weighs eyewitness testimony as it weighs all other testimony: with a skeptical eye.

After the trial, well after the trial, Andrea Reed recanted her testimony. She claimed she lied to the police that night and lied to the jury during the trial.  I’ll defer to her words. I’ll allow her to tell you why she might have had reason to lie.

AFFIDAVIT OF ANDREA JOYCE REED

Dated, September 27, 1997
Gray County, Texas

My name is Andrea Joyce Reed. The attorney who represents Henry Skinner gave me a copy of the written statement that I made to Officer Connie Ogle on January 1, 1994, and the transcript of my testimony at Hank's trial for capital murder in Fort Worth on March 9, 1995. I carefully read both of these documents before I signed this affidavit. I swear that all of the statements in the affidavit are true.

Several of the things that I said in my written statement to Ogle and my trial testimony are false. I lied because of implied threats and I was intimidated by Officer Katie Gerhardt and the district attorney's investigator, Bill McMinn.

This is what really happened. At about midnight on the night of December 31, 1993 , I was in the bedroom of my trailer house at 705 Henry St. in Pampa, Texas, with my daughter, Jessica, and son, Kris, when I heard someone pounding on the wall. I asked the person to identify himself and I heard a voice that I recognized as Hank shouting, “Andy, I’m hurt. Please let me in" or words to that effect. At first, I told Hank to leave and threatened to call the police if he did not do so. Hank was an old friend, but I did not associate with him because he was an alcoholic and drug user.

When I told Hank to leave, he said that he had been shot and pleaded with me to help him. I turned on my porch light and opened the front door so that I could see him. Hank had a lot of blood on him. I decided to help him because I felt sorry for him. I went back into the house, put my dog in the bedroom with my children, closed the door to that room and went outside again. Hank was still standing in the front yard. I invited him to come into the house. He stumbled and fell over backwards when he tried to climb up the porch stairs. I caught him or helped him to get up. He had to lean on my arm as we walked into the house. He was with me for over three hours before he was arrested.

Very shortly after Hank was taken into custody, I heard Officer Katie Gerhardt tell one of my curious neighbors that he could not enter my house because it was "a triple homicide crime scene." I assumed that this meant that Hank was accused of murdering three people. I did not understand how my house could be a crime scene because no crime was committed there, but I feared that the police believed that I was involved in the offense.

My fear of being falsely accused increased when McMinn and Gerhardt told me that they believed that Hank had an accomplice and asked me where that person was. I told them I did not know what they were talking about, but they apparently did not believe me because they kept asking the same question. Gerhardt finally told me that I could be charged with being an accessory after the fact if I did not cooperate with them. I did not understand why she made that threat because I believed that I was cooperating .

I told my first lie when Gerhardt and McMinn asked me how Hank got into my house. I was afraid to admit that I helped him inside because I did not want to say anything that could later be used to suggest that I offered a murderer a place to hide from the police who were trying to arrest him. I told McMinn and Gerhardt that he entered the house without my consent and I did not know how. Gerhardt said that she did not believe me. She asked me why I did not try to leave my house and get help. I told her that I did not want to leave my kids alone with Hank. She warned me that I could be charged with a crime if I invited him into my house knowing that the police were trying to arrest him.

My written statement to Ogle left the false impression that I only treated Hank's wounded hand because he entered my house against my will and threatened to kill me. I did not admit that I invited him in because I was afraid that the police would arrest me for helping a wanted man.

I falsely claimed in my written statement that Hank warned me, "don't call anyone or I'll kill you" when he saw me pick up the telephone. Hank did tell me not to call anyone, but he did not threaten to kill me.

I falsely claimed in my written statement that I believed that Hank was capable of killing me because of his intoxicated condition. The truth is that he was much too drunk or high on drugs to physically carry out such a threat. I know what Hank is capable of doing when he is intoxicated because I saw him in that condition many times. When he arrived at my house, he was too intoxicated to strangle Twila Busby until her neck broke, repeatedly hit her on the head with an ax and precisely stab her two sons to death .

I also lied in my written statement about two small details because I did not want the police to believe that I voluntarily did anything for Hank. I said that Hank took his shirt off and hung it over a chair in my living room. The truth is that I helped him remove his shirt and I put it on the chair. I said that Hank washed blood off of his watch. The truth is that I washed off the blood.

When I described in my written statement how Hank said that he thought that he tried to kick Twila to death because he found her in bed with her ex-husband, I left out the fact that Hank gave me a ridiculous description of Twila's ex-husband that did not fit him at all. This is one of the reasons why I believe that his statement about kicking Twila to death was just a drunken fantasy like the other violent stories that he told me to explain how he was injured.

I informed Ogle that I did not want my daughter, Jessica, to be a witness because it would be a traumatic experience for her. Ogle told me that it was up to the district attorney. I was very upset when I received a letter from John Mann notifying me that Jessica would be subpoenaed as a witness. I sent her out of town to stay with a relative shortly after I received that letter. McMinn warned me that I would be arrested if I did not tell him where she was. I told McMinn that it was his job to find his witnesses -- not mine. McMinn finally promised that my daughter would not have to be a witness if I testified "as instructed by John Mann."

When I arrived in Ft. Worth for the trial, Gerhardt and McMinn told me that I could not go anywhere or do anything without a police officer or prosecutor being present. I was not allowed to eat alone in a restaurant, receive visitors at my hotel, make phone calls or take a walk by myself. Gerhardt even insisted we share a room. I felt like a prisoner. I was told that all of this was done for my own safety, but that explanation made no sense because Hank was in jail and no one had threatened me. I was more afraid of the cops who were supposedly protecting me than I was of Hank on the night of the murder.

Shortly before I testified at the trial, Assistant District Attorney Tracy Blades gave me a document in a clear plastic folder and told me, "read it. This is your part. She explained that the document was a "condensed" version of my statement to Ogle. It placed several things that I said way out of context, but I cannot recall what they were.

I tried to follow the script that Blades gave me because that is what I was instructed to do and I still wasn’t sure they (Law) would leave my daughter alone, but I did not believe my testimony was going to be helpful to the State. I did not understand how anything that Hank did or said at my house on the
night of the murders could possibly show whether he was guilty or innocent.

When Mann asked me how Hank was able to get in to my house after I told him to leave, I falsely answered, "I don't even know." I repeated what I told the police on the night of the murder because I was afraid to admit that I lied to them and I did not believe that the truth could make a difference. I lied again for the same reason when Mann asked me what Hank did with his shirt and watch.

I falsely testified that Hank walked to the bathroom by himself when I went to make a telephone call because I was still afraid to admit that I did any thing to help him. The truth is that I had to help Hank walk from the kitchen to the bathroom before I went to make the call because he was so intoxicated that he could not keep his balance.

I falsely testified that Hank warned me that he would kill me if I tried to call anyone. I lied to the jury about that threat because I said the same thing in my written statement to Ogle and I was afraid to admit that it was false. The truth is that Hank told me not to make a call without threatening to kill me.

I gave the jury the false impression that Hank’s statements about finding Twila in bed with her ex-husband and killing her were not related to each other. The truth is that Hank said that he thought he tried to kick Twila to death because he found her in bed with her ex-husband. The questions that John Mann asked me did not allow me to explain this to the jury.

I falsely testified that out of all of the stories that Hank told me on the night of the murder, the only one that he made me swear not to reveal was his story about kicking Twila to death. The truth is that he swore me to secrecy or made me promise not to tell each time that he gave me a different story about what happened.

I am not sure why I lied about this on the witness stand, but I may have repeated what was in the condensed version of my statement to Ogle that Blades prepared for me. It is also possible that I gave the answer that I thought John Mann wanted to hear.

After Hank was sentenced to death, I read news stories about the trial and began to understand the importance of my testimony. The lies that I told to protect myself made it appear as if Hank broke into my house, held me hostage and confessed to the murders. The truth is that I invited a harmless drunk into my house and listened to three hours of meaningless gibberish. I have no idea who killed Twila Busby and her sons, but I pray that I get another chance to tell the truth about what I do know to a jury because I do not want to be responsible for the execution of a man who may be innocent .

[signed]
Andrea Joyce Reed

Here’s the deal with recantations. They don’t work. 

I’m aware of plenty of people who have recanted their trial testimony.  I’m not aware, however, of a single recantation which has, by itself, led to the release of the defendant / prisoner.  Hopefully someone will inform me of a counter-example to prove me wrong.

In any case, we now know with confidence that Andrea Reed will lie if circumstances so dictate. Either she lied to the police and perjured herself during trial, or she lied when she recanted her testimony. Unfortunately, it happens all the time. Andrea’s situation provides but one more substantiating example for my skeptical juror rule-of-thumb: trust no one.

Trust not the witness, the attorneys, or even the judge. They will lie, muddle, and confuse. All of them will. They will obfuscate, prevaricate, orate, and bloviate. They will attempt to manipulate you. Your only defense  is to remain skeptical of them all. Rely not on their oration and special pleading. Rely instead on the evidence, the physical evidence, and examine that with a jaundiced eye.

Part VII, The Physical Evidence, follows.

Hank Skinner Part VII: The Physical Evidence

Assuming Andrea Reed was truthful during her recantation, the jury that convicted Hank Skinner and sentenced him to death did not know that Hank was too inebriated to climb a few stairs or to remove his own shirt. Nor did they know that the police, early on, suspected another person was involved in killing Twila, Elwin, and Randy.

It’s easy to understand why the police thought someone else was involved. There were bloody bootprints leading to the front door, though Hank seemingly went out the back. And the bootprints were size 11-12, way too large for Hank Skinner. Hank stands 5’ 9” and weighs 140 pounds. His shoe size is 9½. He was found wearing socks that night, but no shoes. He owned no boots, nor were any found.

Elwin, on the other hand, was a large person, and he apparently left through the front door, mortally wounded. But he was found wearing only a pair a bloody underpants. It seemed likely, therefore, that the boot prints were made by someone other than Hank or Elwin. Perhaps they were placed there by the person who killed three people that night.

Also found were bloody handprints on both the front and back doors. It was unlikely that Hank went out both doors. Hank’s handprints were on the back door, and suggested Hank went out that way. The handprint on the front storm door, however -- well, that’s another story. The investigators removed the glass pane and placed it in the sheriff’s evidence vault for safe-keeping. Someone later scraped the handprint off the glass while the pane was under control of the sheriff. It is not generally known, to this day, to whom that print belonged.

There was also the bloody X-LG windbreaker found laying across a chair just feet from where Twila fell. It was a DNA gold-mine of blood, hairs, and sweat. The state would test none of it though, nor would they allow anyone else to test it. Instead, they would have Twila’s mother testify in trial that her daughter liked to wear over-sized coats. That's way better than testing the DNA of the sweat on the windbreaker.

The center of Hank’s defense seemed to be that Hank was so smashed out of his mind that he couldn’t possibly have committed the crime. Not only did Andrea’s testimony destroy that defense, it tainted Hank as a liar. It gave the jury carte blanche for ignoring every thing Hank or his attorney had to say. If Hank was willing to lie about the foundation of his defense, the jurors would realize, then he would lie about anything big or small.

Had I been advising Hank’s defense team, I would suggested the focus of the defense should be on the other piece of evidence that suggested someone else was there that night. I would have told them to focus on the handprint found on the trash bag. That print was tested, and it did not belong to Hank. That print was Hank’s one best hope to avoid the needle.

Found inside the trash bag were a knife and a bloody dish towel. The dish towel had probably been used to clean the prints from the knife, since none were found there. Whoever put the items in the trash bag left his print on the bag. It wasn't Hank's handprint on the bag, and it wasn't Hank who that night wiped down the knife with the dish towel.

Found on the front porch were a second knife and some bloody gauze. Someone wiped down that second knife with the gauze. That’s the same modus operandi as for those items in the trash bag, the bag with the handprint that did not belong to Hank Skinner.

The items on the front porch were clearly not left by the person who went out the back door; they were left instead by the person who went out the front. That was the same person who left the now-missing bloody handprint on the front storm door; the same person who left the too-large-for-Hank bootprints leading to the front door; the same person who left the not-Hank-Skinner handprint on the trash bag, that contained the towel that wiped the knife that stabbed the victim. And that person wasn't Hank Skinner.

It all led back to the handprint on the trash bag. That print did not then and does not now belong to Hank Skinner.

On to Part VIII: To Test or Not To Test.

Hank Skinner Part VIII -- To Test or Not To Test

*** CORRECTION ***

The exact quote stuck through in the post below came from a Hank Skinner post.  I have since learned the quote was not exact, as indicated by his quotation marks, rather that it was paraphrased.  The error is mine for using the quote prior to substantiating it. -- TSJ


There was so much DNA evidence available in the Hank Skinner case that it is easy to lose track of it all. Even an expensive, colorful, professionally generated graphic would be inadequate to tell all there is to tell. In this part of the Hank Skinner story, I will attempt to remedy the problem somewhat.

###

I begin by summarizing the DNA evidence presented at the trial of Hank Skinner.

Twila’s blood was found on Hank’s shirt and pants. The prosecution argued that it came to be there as Hank bludgeoned Twila with the axe handle, after first having strangled her. The defense claimed it came to be there as Hank fell to the floor while trying to rise from a drunken stupor, thereby coming in contact with Twila’s blood, either on her person or on the floor.

Twila’s blood was found also on Elwin. In this case, the prosecution did not argue that it came to be there as Elwin bludgeoned Twila. The defense argued that Elwin must have been standing in the living room near his mother as she was being bludgeoned. They argued further that a stuporous Hank would have been unable to kill either of them, much less both of them.

Elwin’s blood was found on Hank’s pants. The prosecution argued that it came to be there as Hank stabbed Elwin while they were in the bedroom. The defense argued that it came to be there as Hank fell to the floor while trying to rise from a drunken stupor, thereby coming in contact with Elwin’s blood. Alternatively, they argued the blood came to be there as Elwin attempted to roust Hank from his slumber and help him from the house.

Randy’s blood was found on the blanket that partially covered him. The prosecution argued that it came to be there as Hank stabbed Randy three times in the back while Randy lay on the top bunk. They argued further that Hank cut himself while stabbing Randy, that the knife hit bone and Hank’s hand slid down the knife. That is presumably why they tested the blood on the blanket, expecting to find Hank’s blood there. The absence of Hank’s blood did not deter them from their pursuit.

The hairs found on Randy’s blanket, back, and cheek came from Randy himself. Once again, the prosecution presumably expected them to belong to Hank. They did not.

The handprints near the doorway of the boys' bedroom came from Hank. The print was only eighteen inches above the floor. The prosecution argued that it came to be there after Hank stabbed Randy and cut his hand in the process, and after Elwin tackled Hank as Hank was leaving the bedroom. The defense argued that the blood came to be there as Hank stumbled while trying to make his way out the back door. The defense argued further that Hank had cut his hand on the broken light fixture glass when he fell to the floor in his drunken stupor. Alternatively, his appellate counsel would argue that Hank might have been wounded by the same person who killed the others in the household.

The the handprints on the back door came from Hank. The defense argues that Hank left them there as he exited the house in a stuporous state. The prints on the back door leave unexplained the evidence that the killer exited via the front door.

###

After the trial, DA John Mann (Lynn Switzer’s predecessor, once removed) succumbed to public pressure and sent additional DNA material to GeneScreen for testing. He did so to get people to “shut up” and to “put a few more nails” in Hank’s coffin.

The DNA from the two hairs clutched in Twila’s hand came from an unknown male, possibly a male relative of Twila. This finding posed severe problems for Mann, since he had earlier claimed they definitely “came from the head of her assailant as Twila yanked out his hair during the struggle for her life which she ultimately lost.” Mann dealt with the awkward results by lying about them. He ran a 7-month smear campaign against Hank claiming the testing showed the hairs came from Hank Skinner. Only after Mann left office did the DNA lab issue a written report. That report absolutely confirmed Hank to be excluded as the contributor of those hairs clutched in Twila’s hand. Because Mann had cleverly provided comparative DNA samples only from Hank Skinner and Twila Busby, the results could not prove or disprove the possible male relative to be Twila’s predatory uncle, Robert Donnell.

Blood found on the gauze apparently used to wipe fingerprints from the front porch knife excluded both Hank Skinner and Twila Busby as donors.

Blood found on a cassette tape excluded both Hank Skinner and Twila Busby as donors.

Other hairs sent for testing excluded Hank Skinner as the donor, but did not exclude Twila or a relative of Twila’s as potential donors.

The swab from the rape kit was sent for testing along with the other material in this group. The results of that testing were not included along with the other results. The location of the rape kit evidence is now being kept secret from Hank’s defense team and from the public. It is possible, indeed likely, that results from the kit excluded Hank Skinner and are still being suppressed, even as Hank’s execution nears.

The fingernail material was sent for testing along with the other material in this group. The results of that testing were not included along with the other results. The location of the broken fingernails and associated DNA evidence is now being kept secret from Hank’s defense team and from the public. It is possible, indeed likely, that the results from the fingernail scrapings excluded Hank Skinner and are still being suppressed, even as Hank’s execution nears.

The broken fingernails nonetheless exculpate Hank Skinner. It is likely Twila broke them as she fought for her life, possibly as she clawed at her assailant's head and came away with several of his hairs in her grasp. We don’t need the DNA from the broken fingernails to tell us they weren’t broken while clawing Hank. He had no scratches on him when he was arrested for her murder.

###

Despite all the DNA material tested both before and after the trial, there remains still to this day substantial DNA material to be tested.

The blood, hairs, and sweat from the windbreaker resting just a few feet from Twila’s body have not been tested.

The blood from the handprint left on the front storm door has not been tested, and may never be tested. The police removed that pane from the storm door, covered the print with firm paper taped around the edges, and stored that pane in the Sheriff’s evidence vault. While under the control of the sheriff, someone scraped the handprint from the pane.

The dish towel from the from the trash bag was not tested, despite a possible blood stain on that towel. It’s possible the towel was used to wipe the fingerprints from the knife which was found in the same trash bag. That’s the trash bag that had the handprint that did not belong to Hank Skinner.

The blood on the knife in the trash bag was not tested, though it is likely that knife was the one used to stab both Randy Busby and Elwin Caler. That knife was found in the trash bag that had the handprint that did not belong to Hank Skinner.

The knife found on the front porch was not tested for the presence of blood. It appeared to have none. It seems not to be the murder weapon. That suggests that the blood on the gauze that was apparently used to wipe the prints from the knife originated elsewhere, possibly from the killer.

Most significantly, no DNA sample was ever taken from Robert Donnell. The police never requested a saliva, blood, or semen sample from Twila's maternal uncle.

In Part IX of this X part series: we'll take a closer look at Uncle Robert.

Hank Skinner Part IX: Uncle Robert

Howard Mitchell held a New Years Eve party on the night of the murder. He picked Twila up at her home and drove her to the party. The two of them left Hank behind because he was out cold. Mitchell had been unable to rouse him, even after efforts to physically lift him from the couch.

Mitchell returned Twila to her house soon after she arrived at his party because she was being harassed by none other than her predatory uncle Robert Donnell.

In September of 1994, nine months after the murder and six months before the trial, Howard Mitchell was interviewed by Bill McMinn, an investigator from the DA’s office. Below are excerpts from that interview.

###

Well, we call him Uncle Robert. His name is Robert Duvall [Donnell], I think something like that.

Well, according to my daughter, she said [he left] right after I took Twila home. … He’s real quick tempered and stuff, you know, so I really didn’t hang around with him or nothing. You know, I’d be nice to him, he’s nice to me and all that .

He had … this girl named California Kim. … Him and her got in some kind of drug deal where she was supposed to buy some drugs, took him $350.00 … He wind up in an empty handed deal and he was over at my house one time and he grabbed her by the throat, slammed her up against the wall and said, “I’ll kill you, you son of a bitch, and she was pregnant, you know. And we stopped him, you know, talking and stuff.

And then Doug and this Uncle Robert and Sherry, I don’t know her last name, but they was out at the lake. … Well, Doug, he gets drunk and passes out. Sherry, she was passed out too. But anyway, she wakes up and he’s … got her pants off and trying to get her panties off and she got to kicking and screaming and she woke Doug up, you know. And so Doug talked him out of that bullshit, you know.

And then later on, why he come to town and he stuck a knife in Doug’s stomach, like that, and said, I’ll kill you, you son of a bitch, and then he got it up to his throat and said, I’ll cut your fucking head off. Now that’s strictly confidential, because Doug told me don’t ever tell nobody, but to me.

I’m talking about a man’s life, you know. I’m talking about Hank’s life. I don’t like Hank, you know what I mean? I don’t really dislike him, but I’m not -- we’re not compadres or none of that shit, you know. But I just don’t, my conscience won’t let me keep my mouth shut, you know. I don’t want to see nobody killed that didn’t do it, you know.

I told a detective that, I sure did. I told Harold Comer that. And that’s the truth, too. I’ll take a lie detector test or anything else on it, you know.

I don’t like being involved in none of this shit, you know what I mean?

All I’m doing really basically is I think the man they got [Hank Skinner] is innocent and the other guy [Uncle Robert] is guilty. I really believe that.

I believe this much. If he [Uncle Robert] finds out I said anything like I said, he’s going to come over here and try to kill me and I ain’t got a goddamn gun or nothing else.

And I could be wrong, you know. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.

###

McMinn, the DA investigator was surprised by what he had learned: “Well that’s the kind of information we didn’t have, you know.” He informed Mitchell that he would be speaking with Donnell: “I’m going to have to talk to him, but I sure won’t tell him where my information came from, but I’m going to have to talk to him. I sure am.”

If McMinn ever talked to Donnell, that interview has been suppressed along with so much other evidence in this case.

The trial took place in March of 1995. The defense introduced evidence that Donnell was a heavy-set ex-convict with a hot temper; that he had sexually molested a girl; that he had grabbed a pregnant woman by the throat; that he usually kept a knife in the trunk of his car; that he became drunk at the party.

Mitchell testified that he "sensed that [Donnell] would be a danger" because he had "a certain kind of hate" in his eyes. Donnell followed Twila around as if he was stalking her and made crude sexual remarks, even though Twila was his own niece. Twila became agitated. Within a half hour of her arrival at the party, she asked Mitchell to take her home.

He testified that Twila was "fidgety and worried" when he dropped her off in front of her house at about 11:00 to 11:15 p.m. Twila got out of his car and walked to her front door without any assistance. When Mitchell returned home to his party, Donnell was no longer there.

Neither the police, nor the DA, nor the defense investigated Donnell with any great interest. Critical exculpatory evidence was never presented in Skinner’s defense.

Two and a half years after the trial, in September 1997, Howard Mitchell filed the following affidavit.

###

I came to know Twila’s uncle, Bob Donnell, when he moved to Pampa a few years before Twila was killed. He showed up at my house every once in a while. I had seen him get violent with people and he always carried a knife. I pretty much tried to stay away from Bob Donnell.

Twila told me about problems she had with Bob Donnell. About four months before she was killed, Twila told me Bob Donnell had been making sexual advance towards her and that he had even tried to rape her. I gave this information to the investigator who work for Hank Skinner’s trial attorneys. She told me this several times.

###

It’s not clear why Mitchell only remembered to reveal this information almost four years after the murder. It seems that Mitchell tended to enhance his memory as time went on. His testimony at trial, for example, included considerably more detail that he included in his interview with the DA investigator. In fact, in that interview when asked if Donnell and Twila had any problems at the party, Mitchell replied: “Not that I noticed. … I wasn’t paying that much attention.”

On the other hand, Mitchell’s story about Donnell’s attempted rape of a woman named Sherry was later confirmed by Cliff Carpenter, an investigator for Skinner’s appellate team. I quote below from his report of February 2001.

###

I have spoken with Willie Mae Gardner. Donnell's widow, who told me that Donnell occasionally talked about having killed a man during a pool hall fight in a small town near Oklahoma City. On some of these occasions, Donnell showed Gardner a scar of what he said was a knife wound from the fight.

I have also spoken with Deborah Ellis, the granddaughter of Willie Mae Gardner, who told me that she witnessed Donnell "choke" and "push around" Gardner numerous times.

I spoke with Jimmy Hayes, a close acquaintance of Donnell. Hayes told me that Donnell always carried a large knife either on his person or in his pickup truck. Hayes also told me that once Donnell had attempted to slash Hayes with the knife. and cut Hayes' shirt but did not injure him. I have obtained the shirt, which has a cut across the left breast pocket.

Hayes also stated that on several occasions, Twila Busby called him to come over to her house to protect her because she was as afraid of Donnell. Hayes' wife Dorinda confirmed this.

I have spoken to Sherry Barnette, who told me that summer before the murders of Twila Busby, Randy Busby, and Elwin Caler, Donnell attempted to rape her at a lake near Pampa. During the assault, Donnell tried to "choke her down." Barnette also said that she had been at Twila Busby's house on several occasions when Busby bad to run Donnell off because of his temper.

According to Willie Mae Gardner, on the night of the murders Donnell arrived home very late or in the early morning hours. The police came to Donnell's home to notify him of the deaths. Gardner recalled that the police knocked at the door at approximately 6 a.m. the morning after the murders, and Donnell said he would go see who was there. He returned. few minutes later and stated Twila and the boys had been killed. Gardner specifically recalled that Donnell was emotionless when he conveyed this news.

According to Willie Mae Gardner, Donnell repainted his pickup truck within a week of the murders. The truck had been white and Donnell painted it blue.

According to Deborah Ellis, within a week after the murders. Donnell also thoroughly cleaned out the interior of his pickup truck. He took out the interior carpet from the floorboard. and thoroughly washed. the plastic seat covers and interior of the truck with a water hose. This was unusual, as, according to Willie Mae Gardner, Donnell was a man who had to be told to take a bath.

###

I doubt that even the damning information revealed in Carpenter’s report, had it been revealed during the trial, would have saved Skinner. Assuming Donnell killed Twila and her sons, the defense needed to place him at the crime scene. Had they done that, the jury would likely have set Skinner free.

Harold Comer, Skinner’s over-priced and under-motivated attorney, made no effort to place Donnell at the murder scene, though he had obvious opportunity to do so. He could have had tested the blood, hair, and sweat left at the scene against Donnell’s DNA.

Even if he had been unable to obtain a sample of Donnell’s DNA, he could have determined if the DNA evidence was consistent with a male, maternal relative of Twila. That in fact happened after the trial. The hairs found clasped in Twila’s hand, the hairs pronounced by the DA to belong to the killer, turned out to come from a male, maternal relative of Twila. They did not come from Hank Skinner. According to the standard set by the DA before the testing, those hairs exonerated Hank Skinner.

Even in the absence of testing any DNA, the defense could have compared prints found on the trash bag with those of Robert Donnell. He wouldn't have even needed Donnell's permission. Donnell’s prints were already on file due to his frequent encounters with the law. That trash bag contained the knife with the blood on it, and a bloody dish towel probably used to wipe prints from the knife. Whoever put the knife and dish towel in that trash bag left his signature behind in the form of hand and fingerprints.

It is inconceivable that no one has ever compared the prints from that trash bag against those of Robert Donnell. The authorities certainly understood the significance of those prints. They compared the prints against those of Hank Skinner, only to be surprised they did not match. Are we to believe they didn’t take the few minutes necessary to check them against those of a man identified by several people as the likely killer?

Are we to believe that?

And finally, the tenth and final part of this series: The End.