AL AL - J.B. Beasley, 17, & Tracie Hawlett, 17, Ozark, 31 July 1999 #4 *ARREST*

[Andreee]

John Lordan just posted yet another video on UT re. this case!

 

[ncbamf]

Wondering if anyone remembers details, or has an article or other info in this case about a theory that the killer was left handed?? Does that ring any bells?

I heard this discussion on the latest podcast and decided to see if anybody had commented. I do not know if this is the answer but state's exhibit #3 from that last document dump listed some tape lifts as items collected as evidence. The left-hand tape lift revealed presence of gun powder particles; the right-hand tape lift failed to reveal the presence of gun powder.

The location of the GSW on the right side of Beasley's face and the powder stipple on her right hand suggest to me that the killer held the gun in their left hand and was facing Beasley when the shot was fired.

 

[Niner]

ncbamf to WS & this thread. And thank you for that info!

 

[ncbamf]

Getting back on topic, did anyone watch the defence perspective on John Lordan's ut site? I have not yet.

I’ll chime in...


This interview was not the first signal that the defense is in over their heads here. As soon as a conviction is rendered, motions to appeal will be granted based on inadequate defense. It seems like that is the defense’s strategy: conviction looks certain so pollute the jury pool with wild theories, odd testimony and theatrics, and ensure it takes as long as possible to execute post-conviction.


That is, of course, assuming a conviction is rendered. This trial is going to be a circus. With the staggering amount of urban myth surrounding this case and judging from opinions that seem to be crystallizing locally, a conviction is not a foregone conclusion. I would wager a mistrial is the most likely outcome. One of these teams, either state or defense, is going to blow it. They both might. At least the state is keeping quiet about it for now.

 

[Blacklist]

I’ll chime in...


This interview was not the first signal that the defense is in over their heads here. As soon as a conviction is rendered, motions to appeal will be granted based on inadequate defense. It seems like that is the defense’s strategy: conviction looks certain so pollute the jury pool with wild theories, odd testimony and theatrics, and ensure it takes as long as possible to execute post-conviction.


That is, of course, assuming a conviction is rendered. This trial is going to be a circus. With the staggering amount of urban myth surrounding this case and judging from opinions that seem to be crystallizing locally, a conviction is not a foregone conclusion. I would wager a mistrial is the most likely outcome. One of these teams, either state or defense, is going to blow it. They both might. At least the state is keeping quiet about it for now.

Welcome. Glad to have you here.
I find your opinion plausible. In expansion of your thoughts I feel both the defense and prosecution are in deep waters, but not over their heads completely. Multi-pronged strategies by the defense are clear and will come out even more. After all, it is a capital case and one has to pull all the stops out on this one.
The Prosecution remaining silent. Nothing new or wrong here from their position. Discounting a mistrial, they have one shot at a conviction. They are not going to chance pooching the case up by premature public disclosure of case material and strategy. No matter the public’s hunger and right to know, even a scintilla of premature disclosure would be twisted and manipulated by numerous factions with onerous purpose. Also take note the AG’s capital offense prosecution team has a silent “second chair” with the prosecution. If it were felt that insecure process was in play, they will step in assured.

Again, good to have you here. Appreciate your input

 

[Blacklist]

On another point. I appreciate the principals of Three Men and a Mystery of speaking of and giving some credit to Veronica Silver (Shined Rabbit) for her work. She has probably had more influence in this than most will ever know.
She is a person of tenacious pursuit, clarity of focus and has been working on this case without public flair for quite some time now. No positions to take, no hunger for attention for ego sake, just integrated honesty. I admire her.
I see more to come in the future.

 

[rsanders27]

Differences patched up in McCraney gag order request

 

[YESorNO]

Agreement reached to keep McCraney hearings open to press, public

July 26, 2019

"DALE COUNTY, Ala. (WSFA) - An agreement has been reached that will allow news outlets and the public to be in the courtroom for capital murder suspect Coley McCraney’s pretrial hearings.

In June, Gray Television, the parent company of WSFA 12 News, joined the Alabama Broadcasts Association, the Alabama Press Association and the Dothan Eagle in filing a motion after prosecutors asked a judge to block news outlets and the public from the hearings...."

Agreement reached to keep McCraney hearings open to press, public

 

[morf13]

I hope that they have the right guy, I really do. My gut feeling is that they do, but will be interesting to see when/how/where McCraney and the girls crossed paths.
Strictly speaking from the Defense's perspective, I don't know that the case is a slam dunk. There is McCraney's DNA there on J.B., no doubt, and barring that it was planted, he had to have deposited there either through consensual act or non consensual act. If it's non consensual then he is almost certainly the killer. He has already reportedly told police in their initial questioning that he didn't know J.B. if true, that could haunt him because how did his semen wind up on her clothes? But the issue is, he reportedly asked for an attorney many times during that questioning and was refused one. If a court later orders that whatever he said in that interview inadmissible because he wasn't given an attorney, what's to stop him from then saying later that he did know them and had a relationship with J.B.? Or not say anything and allow the defense team to plant the idea that there was a relationship. If there are finger or palm prints that match McCraney on top of the DNA, that's even more damning of McCraney. However, if there is no gun, prints, witness, anything at all that ties him to the crime, then the case against him may not be as strong as we'd like to think. I'd hate to see him get off if he's the right guy, and I'd equally be disappointed if he paid the price for what someone else did. Like I said, my gut tends to lean towards him being the killer, but there is more to this case that hasn't revealed itself yet

 

[jaejae]

I hope that they have the right guy, I really do. My gut feeling is that they do, but will be interesting to see when/how/where McCraney and the girls crossed paths.
Strictly speaking from the Defense's perspective, I don't know that the case is a slam dunk. There is McCraney's DNA there on J.B., no doubt, and barring that it was planted, he had to have deposited there either through consensual act or non consensual act. If it's non consensual then he is almost certainly the killer. He has already reportedly told police in their initial questioning that he didn't know J.B. if true, that could haunt him because how did his semen wind up on her clothes? But the issue is, he reportedly asked for an attorney many times during that questioning and was refused one. If a court later orders that whatever he said in that interview inadmissible because he wasn't given an attorney, what's to stop him from then saying later that he did know them and had a relationship with J.B.? Or not say anything and allow the defense team to plant the idea that there was a relationship. If there are finger or palm prints that match McCraney on top of the DNA, that's even more damning of McCraney. However, if there is no gun, prints, witness, anything at all that ties him to the crime, then the case against him may not be as strong as we'd like to think. I'd hate to see him get off if he's the right guy, and I'd equally be disappointed if he paid the price for what someone else did. Like I said, my gut tends to lean towards him being the killer, but there is more to this case that hasn't revealed itself yet

Good post. I want to see victims get justice and killers caught and tried to get victims relatives what I believe to be the truth in these cases. There is a possibility that the DNA science used in this case is flawed and the DNA hit is erroneous and misleading. If someone committed these crimes they deserve to be punished. My opinion is this man is very likely innocent based on years of study and his lawyers appear to be doing a very good job and if they are interested in what I say they will attack the DNA evidence head on and question the validity and science behind the DNA. Thank you.

 

[Bit Analyzer]

Good post. I want to see victims get justice and killers caught and tried to get victims relatives what I believe to be the truth in these cases. There is a possibility that the DNA science used in this case is flawed and the DNA hit is erroneous and misleading. If someone committed these crimes they deserve to be punished. My opinion is this man is very likely innocent based on years of study and his lawyers appear to be doing a very good job and if they are interested in what I say they will attack the DNA evidence head on and question the validity and science behind the DNA. Thank you.

It’s not a matter of “if” someone committed these crimes, the matter is who. DNA evidence, proximity of his house to location of girls bodies, and some have even mentioned a possible palm print as evidence. There’s his historic bad act, a criminal act he was involved in when during the military. If I were a victim’s family member, I’d not just want anyone arrested and framed for these murders. I expect a thorough explanation of how the DNA genetic data base led to a clue, which then lead to the collection of the suspect’s real DNA compared with the DNA found on one of the girls back when it happened and it matched. I hope the Justice System prevails and the correct person is found to be the murderer. Due to the nature of it being a cold case, another man confessing years ago with no evidence against him, plus the rumors of police mishaps early on, I think it is wise to keep the prosecutors and defense lawyers from talking about the case, so that juries don’t come predisposed. If selected to be on the jury, each should start with a clear unbiased mind, gather the facts, and deliberate. I have faith that the Justice System works in most cases.

 

[Crazy Mama]

If his DNA matched the crime scene and he lived in Australia then we would be skeptical for sure, but his location plus history of some kind of domestic abuse or more and whatever else the prosecution have against him will surely convict him, it can’t go another way... I think!

 

[wary]

Good post. I want to see victims get justice and killers caught and tried to get victims relatives what I believe to be the truth in these cases. There is a possibility that the DNA science used in this case is flawed and the DNA hit is erroneous and misleading. If someone committed these crimes they deserve to be punished. My opinion is this man is very likely innocent based on years of study and his lawyers appear to be doing a very good job and if they are interested in what I say they will attack the DNA evidence head on and question the validity and science behind the DNA. Thank you.

If this is the type of DNA that I think it is—a sizable sample of DNA collected at the time, then attacking the DNA is a losing and laughable tactic—that ship sailed in the early 1990s. His best hope is to claim consensual sexual intercourse, and hope that someone on the jury believes him. The biggest problem with that, I think, is that he is likely to not want to testify, so his lawyer will be left to try to claim that the DNA might be from consensual activity, while the jury ask themselves: “If it’s true, why doesn’t HE want to say so?”

MOO

 

[jaejae]

If this is the type of DNA that I think it is—a sizable sample of DNA collected at the time, then attacking the DNA is a losing and laughable tactic—that ship sailed in the early 1990s. His best hope is to claim consensual sexual intercourse, and hope that someone on the jury believes him. The biggest problem with that, I think, is that he is likely to not want to testify, so his lawyer will be left to try to claim that the DNA might be from consensual activity, while the jury ask themselves: “If it’s true, why doesn’t HE want to say so?”

MOO

Interesting but just to play Devil's Advocate as such but why should someone be reduced to a false defence of consensual sex if they had no contact with the victims and it was the supposed DNA hit and science behind it that was wrong. A consensual sex argument is likely to mean a certain conviction. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[wary]

Interesting but just to play Devil's Advocate as such but why should someone be reduced to a false defence of consensual sex if they had no contact with the victims and it was the supposed DNA hit and science behind it that was wrong. A consensual sex argument is likely to mean a certain conviction. Thanks for your thoughts.

Well, think back to the early 1990s, when DNA testing in rape cases became standard. The accused rapists started claiming that it had been consensual sex, not because it was a good defense, but because, with DNA testing, it was their only possible defense.

So, as I said—the science of DNA matching has been fairly settled since the early 1990s. So, if the sample is good, (not something like touch DNA, or degraded samples,) then the judge might not even allow them to challenge the DNA match. Or they might not be able to find an expert who would be ready to destroy his reputation by challenging something that’s so settled. And, of course, the fact that they traced the defendant as a suspect through genetic genealogy doesn’t affect the validity of the DNA match in any way.

MOO

 

[jaejae]

Well, think back to the early 1990s, when DNA testing in rape cases became standard. The accused rapists started claiming that it had been consensual sex, not because it was a good defense, but because, with DNA testing, it was their only possible defense.

So, as I said—the science of DNA matching has been fairly settled since the early 1990s. So, if the sample is good, (not something like touch DNA, or degraded samples,) then the judge might not even allow them to challenge the DNA match. Or they might not be able to find an expert who would be ready to destroy his reputation by challenging something that’s so settled. And, of course, the fact that they traced the defendant as a suspect through genetic genealogy doesn’t affect the validity of the DNA match in any way.

Interesting as usual. I do not want to go around in circles again but to me the fact genetic genealogy was used does raise doubts about the validity of the DNA hit and if I were his lawyers or if they read my posts this is the avenue I would go down. Thanks.

 

[wary]

Interesting as usual. I do not want to go around in circles again but to me the fact genetic genealogy was used does raise doubts about the validity of the DNA hit and if I were his lawyers or if they read my posts this is the avenue I would go down. Thanks.

Here’s the situation.

1: They find a suspect by using genetic genealogy. At that point, it is not certain that he is the criminal. Law enforcement officials would be the first to agree, I believe. He is a suspect. They might well have several suspects.

2: They use the traditional, 30 years old DNA testing to compare a sample of a suspect’s DNA with the sample from the crime scene. If it matches, they arrest him. If it doesn’t, they move on, knowing that he was not the one they were looking for.

Note that this stage 2 is the same, whether they have a suspect from genetic genealogy, a suspect from an eyewitness looking at mug shots, a suspect who behaved suspiciously after the murder. The process is the same, and stage 2 is valid, no matter how they have found a suspect.

 

[jaejae]

Here’s the situation.

1: They find a suspect by using genetic genealogy. At that point, it is not certain that he is the criminal. Law enforcement officials would be the first to agree, I believe. He is a suspect. They might well have several suspects.

2: They use the traditional, 30 years old DNA testing to compare a sample of a suspect’s DNA with the sample from the crime scene. If it matches, they arrest him. If it doesn’t, they move on, knowing that he was not the one they were looking for.

Note that this stage 2 is the same, whether they have a suspect from genetic genealogy, a suspect from an eyewitness looking at mug shots, a suspect who behaved suspiciously after the murder. The process is the same, and stage 2 is valid, no matter how they have found a suspect.

I am not going to continue to debate it just because it will go around in circles. What you say makes sense apart from the fact I believe innocent people have been accused of crimes they did not commit so there is something wrong with the science. Interesting posts though and I say again I care about justice for the victims families and want violent criminals taken off the streets. Cheers.

 

[SavageMarkIII]

Today would have been JB’s Birthday. I’m sure both families go through all the “what if’s” and “I wonder’s” at this time every year. I can’t imagine their continued grief.

Much love and many prayers to the families, friends and anyone who knew and loved JB and Tracie. May justice be swift and fair.

 

[YESorNO]

Attorneys silenced following gag order ruling

July 31, 2019

"Prosecutors and attorneys involved in a double-murder case in Ozark have agreed to not publicly comment on the case following a judge’s ruling on Friday, July 26.

On June 17, Assistant Dale County District Attorney David Emery filed a motion in the case of Coley McCraney, arrested for the 1999 deaths of J.B. Beasley and Tracie Hawlett, that would prohibit media coverage of pretrial hearings and prevent attorneys from speaking to any media organization.

According to WTVY, the news station, along with WSFA and the Dothan Eagle, filed an additional motion to object the state’s request to prevent media coverage of pretrial hearings in the McCraney case....

The pretrial agreement, signed by McCraney and his defense attorneys Harrison and Andrew Scarborough as well as Thirty-third Judicial Circuit District Attorney Kirke Adams and Assistant DA Emery, states that “media may attend any court proceeding open to the public for the purpose of observing and reporting on the proceeding from either memory or notes taken. The independent recording of a court proceeding is not allowed.”

The agreement also states that both the defense and state “are to refrain from making public statements… when such comments are made in such a manner that a reasonable person would expect publication either by mass media or social media.”..."

Attorneys silenced following gag order ruling