Witness for the Defense
March 9, 1994
DAVIDSON: Can you state your name please?
HUTCHISON: Pamela Hutchison
DAVIDSON: Ok, you'll need to speak up uh - Pamela uh - where do you live?
HUTCHISON: Uh - right now, I am residing with a friend at Lakeshore.
DAVIDSON: At Lakeshore trailer park?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh - are you Damien Echols' mother?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh - who are you married to?
HUTCHISON: Joe Hutchison
DAVIDSON: Joe Hutchison?
HUTCHISON: Yes
DAVIDSON: And uh - how long uh - have you lived there at uh - Lakeshore?
HUTCHISON: Um - about two weeks.
DAVIDSON: Ok. So you just moved there?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Back at May 5th of 1993, where did you live then?
HUTCHISON: Um - in Broadway trailer park in West Memphis.
DAVIDSON: In West Memphis?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And that's in the town of West Memphis, is that correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Um - not anywhere near Lakeshore or Highland trailer park or anything like that?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh - how long had you lived there?
HUTCHISON: Um - a little over a year.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And there at that residence - let's go back uh - a year to May of 1993. Who was living there uh, in your uh, household at that time?
HUTCHISON: My husband, myself, my mother, Damien, and my daughter.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And your husband is uh -
HUTCHISON: (interrupting) Joe Hutchison
DAVIDSON: Joe Hutchison, and your daughter is?
HUTCHISON: Michelle Echols
DAVIDSON: Michelle Echols, who is your other son?
HUTCHISON: Uh, Damien Echols.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, who else did you say lived there?
HUTCHISON: My mother.
DAVIDSON: Your mother?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, has your mother since past away?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, but was she living there during May of uh, 1993?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And during May of 1993, uh, you were living with your husband Joe Hutchison?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Is that Damien's natural father?
HUTCHISON: Yes, it is.
DAVIDSON: Now, explain to us uhh, first of all, his name is Damien Echols, so explain to us uh, have you always been married to Joe Hutchison?
HUTCHISON: No, I have not.
DAVIDSON: Um, when did you all first marry?
HUTCHISON: Um, we first married in 1973.
DAVIDSON: 1973?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And when was Damien born?
HUTCHISON: In '74.
DAVIDSON: In '74, and um, how long did you all stay together?
HUTCHISON: 11, almost 12 years.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And did you separate and divorce at that point?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And did you remarry?
HUTCHISON: Yes, I remarried.
DAVIDSON: And who did you marry?
HUTCHISON: Jack Echols.
DAVIDSON: Jack Echols, and did uh, after some time, did Mr. Echols uh, actually adopt Damien?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, he did.
DAVIDSON: And uh, at that time, was his name changed?
HUTCHISON: Uh, not immediately, no.
DAVIDSON: Not immediately. Now with the adoption, through that process and the name changed, was uh --
(tape flipped)
DAVIDSON: -- name right now?
HUTCHISON: Damien Wayne Echols.
DAVIDSON: Damien Wayne Echols?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, he was born as, what was his given name at birth?
HUTCHISON: Michael Wayne Hutchison.
DAVIDSON: Michael Wayne Hutchison. And uh, did, how old was Damien about when this occurred?
HUTCHISON: Uh, about 16.
DAVIDSON: About 16. And did you all discuss uh, changing the name to Echols?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Had that been a matter of discussion for quite awhile?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, when this happened uh, did you all discuss reasons for, for changing the name?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Were you agreeable in allowing him to be able to do that?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, did you subsequently divorce uh, Jack Echols?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Around when was that?
HUTCHISON: Um, in April of '92, I believe.
DAVIDSON: April of '92. And after that, were you reunited with Joe Hutchison?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: So in May of 1993, Joe Hutchison, you remarried your first husband?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, so Joe Hutchison was living in there May of '93?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Now um, I want to talk a little bit about, about Damien uh, did he have his own room there?
HUTCHISON: No sir, he did not.
DAVIDSON: Um, just wasn't enough room for him to have his own room?
HUTCHISON: No sir, there wasn't.
DAVIDSON: And uh, where did he usually sleep?
HUTCHISON: Um, in his sister's bedroom.
DAVIDSON: In his sister's bedroom. And where would she sleep?
HUTCHISON: On the couch.
DAVIDSON: On the couch. And uh, was that in the back of the trailer?
HUTCHISON: No sir, it was in the front of the trailer.
DAVIDSON: In the front of the trailer. Uh, where was the bedroom that uh, Damien slept?
HUTCHISON: In the middle of the trailer.
DAVIDSON: In the middle of the trailer. And where would your mother sleep?
HUTCHISON: In the front bedroom.
DAVIDSON: Front bedroom. And where would you and Joe sleep?
HUTCHISON: In the back bedroom.
DAVIDSON: In the back bedroom. Ok. And uh, in the room that you say Michelle's room, was he able to keep some of his things in there and that sort of thing?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, what types of things did Damien do?
HUTCHISON: Um, he liked to listen to the radio, he reads a lot, watch tv.
DAVIDSON: Uh, does a lot of reading?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, uh, did he like music?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: What type of music did he listen to a lot?
HUTCHISON: Rock.
DAVIDSON: And uh, as any teenager, did he talk on the phone?
HUTCHISON: Yes. A lot.
DAVIDSON: A lot. Did that sometimes uh, get aggravating?
HUTCHISON: Yes, it did.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Um, who would he talk with?
HUTCHISON: Uh, Domini Teer -
DAVIDSON: (interrupting) Just friends?
HUTCHISON: Uh huh. Several friends.
DAVIDSON: And Domini was his girlfriend, is that correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Now, I wanna go uh, first of all, in the last of April or the first of May uh, 1993, did you detect anything unusual with Damien?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: His demeanor and that sort of thing, was it pretty well the same as it had been several months before that?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Now, I'd like to go particularly to May 5th of 1993, do you recall that day?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, I think so.
DAVIDSON: Uh, could you tell us about that date and what you did and what you know your son may have done uh, just start us out on that day, start us out in that morning and tell us a little bit about what happened.
HUTCHISON: Well, in the morning, I got him up because Damien had a doctor's appointment that day. So, I believe it was around 10 when I got him up. And he had to go to the doctor around 10:30 or 11, so I took him to the doctor and it was about 20 minutes until 1 before we got out of there. And then I carried him uh, out to Lakeshore and dropped him off about 1:00.
DAVIDSON: And who's house did you drop him off at at Lakeshore?
HUTCHISON: Domini Teer.
DAVIDSON: Domini Teer. And that was his girlfriend's house?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, what happened after that?
HUTCHISON: Uh, I went back, uh, well before, prior to that, right before I dropped him off I dropped off a prescription at the pharmacy and uh, I went back home.
DAVIDSON: Where is the pharmacy?
HUTCHISON: At Marion.
DAVIDSON: At Marion?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, is this a prescription that you received at the doctor's appointment?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, did you wait on the prescription?
HUTCHISON: No, I did not.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Were they busy that day?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. So uh, then what happened?
HUTCHISON: Um, I dropped him off then I went back home. And I stayed home until around 4, um, I received a phone call from Damien and I went to pick him up. I picked him up at the laundry mat on Missouri street.
DAVIDSON: Who went with you to pick him up?
HUTCHISON: Joe and Michelle.
DAVIDSON: Now, let's slow down a little bit so I understand uh, around when was this phone call?
HUTCHISON: Um around, it was around 4.
DAVIDSON: And it was Damien that called you?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And you went somewhere to pick him up at that point?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Now, where was it that you went to pick him up?
HUTCHISON: A laundry mat on Missouri street.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, the laundry mat on Missouri street, who went over there with you?
HUTCHISON: My husband and my daughter.
DAVIDSON: Ok, so Joe and your daughter um, Michelle, is that correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: So you and Michelle and Joe go over to the laundry mat, and when you arrive at the laundry mat, who is there?
HUTCHISON: Damien and Domini.
DAVIDSON: Damien and Domini. And uh, what did you do then?
HUTCHISON: They got in the car and we left and went back to Marion to pick up his prescription, I believe before we picked up his prescription, we had dropped Domini off at home at Lakeshore.
DAVIDSON: Is that kind of on the way uh, Lakeshore, is that kind of on the way to Marion?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And is that kind of between West Memphis and Marion?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Describe for us a little bit where that is so the jury will know where that trailer park is.
HUTCHISON: Um, well, I don't know if I can do that or not, uh, there's two different ways to go towards Marion, but we usually go the service road. And the trailer park is setting between West Memphis and Marion.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, so you dropped Domini off and where did you go after you dropped her off?
HUTCHISON: To pick up his prescription.
DAVIDSON: And where did you go to pick this prescription up?
HUTCHISON: Marion.
DAVIDSON: And uh, at a drug store?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: What was the name of the drug store?
HUTCHISON: Marion Discount Pharmacy.
DAVIDSON: And uh, around what time was it at that point?
HUTCHISON: Uh, it was probably around 4:30. Between 4 and 4:30.
DAVIDSON: And what did you do after leaving there in Marion?
HUTCHISON: We went back home.
DAVIDSON: How long do you think you were there at the uh, pharmacy?
HUTCHISON: Probably about 10 minutes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And you went home after that?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Uh, around how long would it take for you to get home from Marion?
HUTCHISON: Um, probably about 10 or 15 minutes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And upon arrival at your house, what did you all do?
HUTCHISON: I probably cooked supper like I usually do.
DAVIDSON: And uh, was, do you recall Damien being there?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And, so he didn't, he didn't leave after you got home?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: At that point, ok, and then what did you all do? Did you eat supper?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, we ate supper and uh, went to visit some friends -
DAVIDSON: (interrupting) Let's go back to supper. Uh, how long, I know it's been a long time ago, you probably don't remember what you cooked do you?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I sure don't.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Um, do you recall how long uh, you were there at the house?
HUTCHISON: We were there at the house until around 7.
DAVIDSON: Around 7?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And then what did you do?
HUTCHISON: We went to visit some friends.
DAVIDSON: When you say "we", who are you talking about?
HUTCHISON: Uh, Joe, Michelle, Damien, and myself.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And so you and Joe and Damien uh, and Michelle got in the car and where is it that you were going?
HUTCHISON: Um, on Balfour, in West Memphis.
DAVIDSON: Balfour. And uh, what were the names of these friends that you were going to see?
HUTCHISON: The Sanders family.
DAVIDSON: The Sanders family?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And the uh, where is Balfour in relation to where you all lived?
HUTCHISON: Um, I would say it was approximately a mile and a half from where we lived at.
DAVIDSON: So, it didn't take you very long to get over there?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: And what happened when you arrived over at the Sanders residence?
HUTCHISON: Uh, we all got out of the car and went inside the house and nobody was there but their daughter.
DAVIDSON: And, ok, so Mr. and Mrs. Sanders weren't at home?
HUTCHISON: No.
DAVIDSON: Who was at home?
HUTCHISON: Their daughter.
DAVIDSON: And uh, did all of you go inside?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Um, so you and Joe and Damien and Michelle, all went inside the Sanders home.
HUTCHISON: (talking over) Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Uh, are they close friends of you all's?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, known 'em for awhile?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, in going over there then did you uh, which daughter was it that was there?
HUTCHISON: Jennifer Sanders
DAVIDSON: Jennifer?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: How old is Jennifer?
HUTCHISON: Um, she is 12 now, I believe.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, did you talk with Jennifer?
HUTCHISON: Yes, we did.
DAVIDSON: Uh, anything else happen while you were there?
HUTCHISON: Uh, no sir, I wrote a note and left for her mother and daddy.
DAVIDSON: What was Jennifer doing when you got there?
HUTCHISON: Um, I don't remember.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, you left a note there for her mom and dad?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, what was the note about?
HUTCHISON: Uh, just to tell her that we had been by because she had invited us over earlier and we weren't planning on going, so I left her a note to tell her that we had been there.
DAVIDSON: Uh, so you weren't planning on going, what, did you change your mind? Tell us about that. Tell the jury what happened.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir. Um, we just changed our mind and decided to go over there to visit for awhile to get out of the house.
DAVIDSON: Is that something unusual for you all to go over there?
HUTCHISON: No.
DAVIDSON: Or for them to come to your house?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, so when you were there uh, you left a note, is that right?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, did you, what did you do then, tell us, just tell us what happened next.
HUTCHISON: Uh, I just left a note and then all of us went back to the car and we went back home.
DAVIDSON: How long would you say that you all were over at the Sanders house?
HUTCHISON: Uh, not more than 30 minutes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Um, and when you went home, uh, who went home with you?
HUTCHISON: Joe, Michelle, and Damien.
DAVIDSON: Joe, Michelle, Damien, and you all four of you went back home?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, what happened then when you all got back to your house?
HUTCHISON: Our regular routine was usually to just watch tv or maybe sit in the bedroom and visit with my mother for awhile.
DAVIDSON: Uh, you recall anything about the tv or anything of that nature?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, did Damien leave that night?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Did uh, what did he do the rest of that evening?
HUTCHISON: Most of the rest of the evening until around 10:30 or 11, he was on the phone.
DAVIDSON: Talking on the phone?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, when you say up until 10:30 or 11, uh, can you recall anything about that? Why can you remember that's about when he stopped?
HUTCHISON: Because Damien and Domini had an argument.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, and you recall that around 10:30 or 11?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, did, around when did you go to bed?
HUTCHISON: Probably around 12.
DAVIDSON: Around 12. Uh, in this trailer uh, around when did Damien go to bed, let me ask you that.
HUTCHISON: Around 11.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Was he in bed when you went to bed?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, I'm trying to figure out how to phrase this, I know that moms can always, can hear a door, I know that my mom could, and how, would you have known if he had gone out that evening?
HUTCHISON: I would think so.
DAVIDSON: Could you, could you hear uh, in that house uh, someone leaving?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, did he leave that night?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: So, when did you get up in the morning?
HUTCHISON: Um, I usually would get up around 8:00.
DAVIDSON: And uh, so on the 6th, when you got up, was Damien there at the house?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And where was he?
HUTCHISON: In the middle bedroom.
DAVIDSON: He was still asleep?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, do you buy his clothes?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: You wash his clothes?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: You pretty well know what clothes he has and doesn't have?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Have any clothes missing or anything around that time?
HUTCHISON: Um, not that I know of.
DAVIDSON: Did you wash any of his clothes that had lots of mud on them around that period of time?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Any, any clothes with blood on them?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: What kind of shoes does Damien, what kind of shoes did he usually wear?
HUTCHISON: Army uh, they're army, I guess they're called army boots.
DAVIDSON: Army type boots?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. About like what he has on today? Stand up Damien, don't say anything just stand up so we can see what you've got on. Walk over here.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: That type of a, ok. Thank you. So uh, had on army type boots, is that what he wore at the time? Oh, I'm sorry, come and walk over here.
(mumbling)
DAVIDSON: Are those the same type of shoes that he wore at that time?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Are those the same shoes?
HUTCHISON: Um, no sir.
DAVIDSON: Uh, and why are those not the same shoes?
HUTCHISON: Because the police took the other pair.
DAVIDSON: The police took the other pair?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, let's talk a little bit about the police. Now, um, the next morning, you get up, which would have been May the 6th, and Damien's in bed. Did you have any contact with the police on the 6th?
HUTCHISON: Um, I'm not sure if it was the 6th or the 7th.
DAVIDSON: Do you recall when the boys were found over in Robin Hood?
HUTCHISON: Um, I recall seeing it on tv.
DAVIDSON: And uh, the day after you saw that, uh, was there -
FOGLEMAN: (interrupting) Your Honor, I would object to leading.
THE COURT: Avoid leading.
DAVIDSON: Ok, when you saw that on tv, does that give you some sort of uh, reference as to when the police may have first come to talk with Damien?
HUTCHISON: Uh -
FOGLEMAN: (interrupting) Again, objection to leading. He is basically saying the answer and she should know, this is his witness that is testifying.
THE COURT: Sustained.
HUTCHISON: Uh -
DAVIDSON: Do you remember the police coming and talking with Damien?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: When was that?
HUTCHISON: Well, the first person that came to the house was Steve Jones.
DAVIDSON: Steve Jones?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Had, now, to your knowledge, is Steve Jones a juvenile officer?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, so Steve Jones came over and talked with Damien, and were you present when that occurred?
HUTCHISON: Uh, I was at home, but he didn't talk to him in front of me.
DAVIDSON: He wouldn't talk with him in front of you?
HUTCHISON: No.
DAVIDSON: Now, uh, so when you -
FOGLEMAN: (interrupting) I think her response was that he didn't talk to him, her response was not that he would not.
DAVIDSON: Where did this conversation take place?
HUTCHISON: In Michelle's bedroom.
DAVIDSON: In Michelle's bedroom. Did he ask you to come back there?
HUTCHISON: No.
DAVIDSON: He did not?
HUTCHISON: No.
DAVIDSON: And did you know what they were talking about?
HUTCHISON: No. I had asked but he didn't answer me.
DAVIDSON: He did not answer you?
HUTCHISON: No.
DAVIDSON: Was anybody with juvenile officer Jones?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Who was with him?
HUTCHISON: Uh, I don't know who he was. He was some kind of an officer.
DAVIDSON: Did he identify himself?
HUTCHISON: No, he did not.
DAVIDSON: And, what happened when they knocked on the door?
HUTCHISON: Uh, I opened the door to see what they wanted and they said they needed to talk to Damien, so I invited them into the living room.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And did you, and where was Damien at at that time?
HUTCHISON: He was in the living room.
DAVIDSON: So you invited them into the living room, how did they get back to the bedroom?
HUTCHISON: He, Steve Jones, asked Damien to uh, if there was some place they could go to talk and Damien let him in to the bedroom.
DAVIDSON: Ok. So you don't know what happened during that conversation?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I don't.
DAVIDSON: Um, ok, that's the first time, did, was there further contact with the police after that?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And do you recall when that may have been?
HUTCHISON: Um, probably around, I would say, the 8th maybe.
DAVIDSON: Um, so, what contact was there at that time?
HUTCHISON: Uh, Damien was carried in for questioning.
DAVIDSON: Carried in for questioning?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And who carried him in there?
HUTCHISON: Uh, it was two gentlemen in a red Bronco type vehicle.
DAVIDSON: And were you at home when they came to get him?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And did they take you with him?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, one time they did.
DAVIDSON: Uh, was this the time they took you with them?
HUTCHISON: I believe it was.
DAVIDSON: And did uh, how long were you down there?
HUTCHISON: Probably a couple hours.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh, and then after that was there further contact with the police?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: When would that have been?
HUTCHISON: Just a day or 2 after.
DAVIDSON: A day or 2 after that?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, where were you, did the police come to your house?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And was Damien there at your house?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And did you go with them at that time?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, did they allow you to be in there when they were questioning your son?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: And is that applied to the previous time also?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And how long were you there at that time?
HUTCHISON: Uh, I'm not sure. I'm not sure the second time he was taken in, how long I was there.
DAVIDSON: And where were you when they were questioning Damien on that last occasion there?
HUTCHISON: Uh, I was sitting outside in the hallway.
DAVIDSON: Sitting outside in the hallway at the police station?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And um, how long were you there?
HUTCHISON: Well, he was carried in several times, uh, there were a couple times when he was only there a couple hours and at one point he was kept for about 8 hours.
DAVIDSON: So on that last day, he was there for how many hours would you say?
HUTCHISON: Uh. The last time that he was carried in is when they kept him approximately 8 hours.
DAVIDSON: And again, you weren't in there with them when they were talking?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: And at one point, did they come and uh, allow you to talk with Damien?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: How were you feeling at this point?
HUTCHISON: I was pretty upset.
DAVIDSON: You were upset?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh, why were you upset?
HUTCHISON: Because he had been carried in and they were constantly coming to the house like day after day, we could leave, pull out of the driveway and we were followed.
DAVIDSON: You were followed?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: How would you know that you were followed?
HUTCHISON: You could see 'em.
DAVIDSON: They come by and take pictures of your house?
HUTCHISON: Yes they did.
DAVIDSON: When I say "they", uh, who are you talking about?
HUTCHISON: Uh, the police officers. Task force, I believe they are.
DAVIDSON: And they would come by and take pictures of your house?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Follow you when you left?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Would they follow you if Damien wasn't with you?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, how long had this been going on?
HUTCHISON: Since right after the murders.
DAVIDSON: And, so did it starts just, how long after the murders do you think this activity began?
HUTCHISON: About 2 days after.
DAVIDSON: About 2 days after?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, would they sit out there and watch the house?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, they did.
DAVIDSON: Now, you said that you were upset when you were up there, um, is, are you saying that's the reason you were upset?
HUTCHISON: I was upset because he was carried in and kept so long.
DAVIDSON: Uh, how did you feel about them questioning him for that long period of time?
HUTCHISON: I didn't mind that they had questioned him for that long period of time, it was just that he was kept without anything to drink or eat, and I was upset over that.
FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, I object to that, she's already said that she wasn't in there. She doesn't know what the officers offered or gave to this defendant.
THE COURT: Sustained.
DAVIDSON: Do you have any personal knowledge about whether or not he was given anything to eat or drink?
HUTCHISON: Um, I was told, Damien told me that he was not given anything to eat.
FOGLEMAN: (interrupting) Your Honor, I object -
THE COURT: (interrupting) Well, sustain the objection based on hearsay.
DAVIDSON: Did an officer tell you anything?
HUTCHISON: No, um, officer Durham had came out and talked to me one time and I told him that Damien had not had anything to eat or drink before he left home and he said he would get him something.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Now, that was officer Durham?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Did someone ask you uh, about talking with Damien?
HUTCHISON: Uh, yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Who was that?
HUTCHISON: Um, I believe it was Mike Allen.
DAVIDSON: Mike Allen?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Did you indeed uh, talk with him that day?
HUTCHISON: With who?
DAVIDSON: Uh, Damien.
HUTCHISON: Um, yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And uh, what did you tell him?
HUTCHISON: Um, I asked him did he know anything about the murders.
DAVIDSON: Ok, well, you don't need to say what he said, but you asked him that?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And um, now, did you say anything else?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: What else did you say?
HUTCHISON: I told him not to say anything else, that we had alibis and I would get in touch with an attorney.
DAVIDSON: And were officers present when you talked?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And um, did you indeed contact a lawyer?
HUTCHISON: Yes, I did.
DAVIDSON: Who did you contact?
HUTCHISON: Mike Everett.
DAVIDSON: And did you have Mike Everett come down there that day?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, I did.
DAVIDSON: Was he able to talk with uh, Damien?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Why not?
HUTCHISON: Um, someone that came to the door did not let him in to see Damien.
DAVIDSON: They wouldn't let him in to see his client?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Were you there when uh, Mike Everett was asking to see his client?
HUTCHISON: Yes, I was.
FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, did you just realize Mr. Davidson just mentioned or made a statement prefaced the question with "They wouldn't let him see his client" and there's no evidence, and I think evidence would be to the contrary at that point and time that he even represented Mr. Echols at that time and therefore, I would object that the jury be admonished to disregard any response.
DAVIDSON: We would not agree with that your Honor. We think that Mike Everett, based upon earlier testimony in this court, actually represented him at that time and that was his purpose for being there and we have already gone over this.
THE COURT: Yeah, the court has already gone over it, approach the bench.
DAVIDSON: That's exactly right your Honor.
THE COURT: Uh, why didn't you call her to testify if you knew at the denno hearing if you wanted to question this, whether or not, you know, if Everett was denied an opportunity but you haven't established when he got there, when they were through talking to him, and you're implying to the jury that, that -
DAVIDSON: (interrupting) Well, I think that's what I'm asking.
THE COURT: Well, well, why didn't you call her in the denno hearing?
PRICE: Judge, if she called Everett and retained him, then my -
THE COURT: Alright, then let's establish times then if you're even going to go into it.
FOGLEMAN: It's still our position that he was 18 years old and unless he exercised his right to an attorney, he didn't have an attorney.
THE COURT: That's exactly right.
PRICE: We've got a counter on that your Honor, if a parent wants to hire an attorney to represent a son regardless -
(continued...)
THE COURT: I don't have any problem about that either, but if he - he was an adult, and he was the one to have to chose his right to counsel.
PRICE: If a parent can hire an attorney to represent, even if it's -
DAVIS: And obviously the reference has been made that there was some denial of access to attorney, which has already been ruled on by this court.
DAVIDSON: No, no.
DAVIS: The court ruled that it would not suppress that statement, the court didn't say anything about there not being access to a lawyer.
(mumbling)
DAVIDSON: That's a fact.
THE COURT: Well, it's irrelevant too.
(talking over each other)
THE COURT: Ok, I'm going to ask the questions.
(open court)
THE COURT: What time did you contact Mr. Everett yourself?
HUTCHISON: I believe it was around 4.
THE COURT: Around 4?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, I believe it was around 4.
THE COURT: Uh - and what time did he arrive at the West Memphis police department?
HUTCHISON: Uh - probably around 5.
THE COURT: Approach the bench gentlemen.
(bench conference)
THE COURT: That's completely contrary to what Mr. Everett said. He said he had actual minutes of when he was contacted and that it was 5:48 and he didn't get to the police department until sometime after 6:20 -
PRICE: (mumbling interruption)
THE COURT: Yeah, but he - he was called.
(mumbling interruption)
FOGLEMAN: They're putting on evidence that's not relevant to these proceedings and then putting us in a position of where we have to call the person who has that actual -
THE COURT: I'm not gonna let you do it, if you wanted to - if you wanted those matters addressed in the denno hearing you should have done it.
DAVIDSON: We're not doing it for the purpose of -
THE COURT: What are you doing it for then?
DAVIDSON: We're doing it for the purpose of showing how they treated my client and how they treated her, and how they treated her lawyer - or his lawyer.
THE COURT: Well, I'm going to allow them to get up and say Mike Everett testified that - said it was a totally different time and all that.
PRICE: We would object to that testimony from the denno hearing -
THE COURT: (interrupting) Yeah, I -
PRICE: -if they want to call Mr. Everett, go ahead, they can do that Judge. We certainly can't -
THE COURT: (interrupting) Well, I have made the ruling on admissibility of this statement and I'm not going to let you go behind that, at this point.
DAVIDSON: Now - now wait, I'm not understanding this. Are you saying that I can't ask her these questions? I'm not, I'm not asking for you to -
THE COURT: (mumbling interruption)
DAVIDSON: Well, just like I said, so they can see -
THE COURT: Are you alleging that he was mistreated -
DAVIDSON: Yeah
THE COURT: That his rights were violated -
PRICE: Because the police did not allow Mr. Everett to talk to his client.
FOGLEMAN: Well, if they're alleging that his rights were violated, that's been determined in the denno hearing.
DAVIDSON: I know, the Judge has already said that, but I think the jury can hear -
PRICE: We'd like to show that before the jury your Honor.
THE COURT: You show me a case that allows you to do that -
PRICE: I, I -
THE COURT: You got one?
PRICE: I don't have one on that, no sir.
THE COURT: I'm not going to allow it.
PRICE: Well, we would like to make a proffer then.
THE COURT: Alright ladies and gentlemen, you'll have to step into the back room please.
(mumbling)
THE COURT: Yeah, I'm going to let the jury go to lunch at this time, you can go to lunch and report back at 1:00. Again, with the reminder not to talk about the case.
(mumbling)
THE COURT: Yeah, if you want to, it's alright with me. Alright, let the record reflect that this is a hearing out of the presence of the jury. Alright gentlemen, as the court understands the issue before the court, we spent an hour or more in a, out of the presence of the jury hearing and an in-camera hearing uh - or denno hearing whatever you want to call it, for the court to consider whether or not the statements made by Damien Echols were voluntarily and knowingly made and made pursuant to his constitutional prerogatives. And in that regard, the court found that one that Damien Echols was an adult citizen uh - over the age of 18 years, that he was read his Miranda warnings on more than one occasion - I recall 3 times, that during that period of time that he was present in the police department uh -
FOGLEMAN: (interrupting) Your Honor, I think it was only once on the Miranda warnings.
THE COURT: Well, I -
FOGLEMAN: I think it was -- by Mr. Misskelley.
THE COURT: No, Mr. Durham read them to him once, the uh - uh - Ridge read them to him once, and uh -
FOGLEMAN: Ok.
THE COURT: I thought there was one other occassion, atleast twice, I thought three times from my recollection of the testimony. Uh - we called witnesses, the state presented it's case with regard to the surpression hearing, you didn't call any witness other than Mr. Echols and ofcourse he alledged that he requested an attorney at some point. Uh - and as I recall it, it was after he had talked to Mr. Durham. Uh - the state didn't ask any questions that were asked of him or give any statements uh - in the third session at all, it only pertained to the first two. Mr. Echols' testimony as I recall it, and I believe I recited it in my ruling, was that he asked to speak to attorney Mike Everett after he had talked to his mother and that was uh - I don't remember the time now, but Mr. Everett - Senator Mike Everett, came and testified in this matter previously uh - he testified that from his notes, records, and account of that this lady, Mrs. Hutchison, is that it?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
THE COURT: Called him at 5:48pm and that that was the first contact that he had had with them and that he did not arrive at the West Memphis police station until sometime after 6:20. Every statement involved in this had already been taken at that time, before he ever arrived. It would have been impossible for Mr. Echols to even know who his mother had contacted prior to 5:48pm, at which time all questioning had ceased. Now, what you want to do is bring it up in front of the jury, a denno hearing where I have already ruled uh - that the confession or statement or remarks, however you want to characterize them uh - that in some fashion the police mistreated Mr. Echols and his mother, is that what you want - is that what your intent and purpose to do at this time is?
DAVIDSON: Your Honor, I am not questioning your ruling in any manner, I understand that is a decision that has already been made by the court, however what happened that day to show when he was questioned, how they were treated, uh - the testimony has already been on that they've been followed and everything else, this is relevant information for the jury to see and -
THE COURT: Relevant to what issue in the case?
DAVIDSON: It's relevant to the way that they harrassed this kid, now they have gotten on there and talked about uh - these statements that were supposedly made that they didn't record, they didn't do anything else, it's relevant that he was back there for 8 hours that day, it's relevant the way they treated him, it's relevant that they didn't allow the lawyer to come in. Now, I understand your Honor, in the denno hearing taking that evidence, I understand why you made your ruling and we are certainly abiding by that, however that doesn't prevent us from putting on other testimony that was not put on before. Now, if you're taking that testimony alone, I understand why you said that with the facts that you just said before the court, but there are other facts that could come forth and I'm not asking you to change your ruling on that, but we're saying that the jury ought to be able to hear that evidence.
THE COURT: Alright. By the very nature of - of the proceeding, if I allow you to go into all this stuff, then the state's going to have to call Mr. Everett back so the jury can hear his version of it so he - so they can be uh - informed that it couldn't have happened the way she said and then you're going to call in 10 more witnesses -
PRICE: Well, they can certainly do that your Honor.
THE COURT: Well, this is getting absurd gentlemen. I, I -
PRICE: Judge, it is also possible for a parent to hire an attorney for an adult son.
THE COURT: It's possible for an Aunt Suzie in Saginaw, Michigan to hire a lawyer for somebody too, it doesn't matter who hires a lawyer, what is the importance of that?
PRICE: Well, I mean, that was one of the arguements that was made up at the bench and I just wanted to clarify that your Honor.
FOGLEMAN: I mean, it's who exercises the right.
THE COURT: Your friend next door can hire you a lawyer.
PRICE: Right.
THE COURT: It's the individual who is charged -
PRICE: If his mother hired Mr. Everett and Mr. Everett came up there and wanted to talk with Mr. Echols, it's certainly something - it's relevant and something that we can bring out and we can do that in front of the jury, if -
THE COURT: For what purpose?
PRICE: For the purpose of showing the jury what happened. The court has made it's ruling about the - did not surpress the statements but that does not prevent us from putting the same testimony on before the jury. If the state wants to call Mr. Everett or anybody else they wanna call, they're -
THE COURT: Well, are you alledging by that conduct in some way he was deprived of his constitutional perrogatives and his rights?
PRICE: At this time we're making the argument that Mr. Everett was up there knocking on the door and wanted to speak to Mr. Echols and it's time we bring that up in front of the jury.
THE COURT: Again, for what purpose?
PRICE: To show that this happened.
FOGLEMAN: But what relevance is it? Even if it did happen that way, what relevance would it have?
DAVIDSON: The relevance is that it shows their course of conduct. They've got their tunnel vision and they saw their person they were going for and they just went straight for it without looking at all these other people.
FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, they have been asked about hundreds of people they've looked at.
DAVIDSON: Judge, one important factor is Mr. Price made an analygy that there were statements made and they should have been surpressed, they weren't, but we have a right to put this on.
FOGLEMAN: The clear and uncontraverted testimony and evidence at the surpression hearing was that Mr. Everett was never even present at the time that any statements were made or which the state introduced at trial and therefore, there was no issue that any statements that have been introduced against Mr. Echols were done at a time when he was being deprived of counsel because Mr. Everett hadn't even been contacted and for them to make allegations of this nature and to put on evidence that like you said opens up a can of worms that we then have to bring evidence to put on is not proper because it goes to the question of whether or not he was denied constitutional rights which is not an issue of the jury to decide but an issue for the court to decide outside of the presence of the jury.
PRICE: The key point Judge, is that my client was ta - even when Mr. Everett was up there, was still talking to the police. The prosecution has decided not to use those statements but the fact that he was up there and they were still talking to him and he - Mr. Everett wanted to talk to my client is - that is certainly relevant. Just because the state -
THE COURT: Relevant to what?
PRICE: The police misconduct in this case. The tunnel vision, the whole defense that we've been going for through the entire case, your Honor. That if Mr. Echols is up there - your Honor stated earlier that if they're not going to use any statements made after 5:48 or whenever the time that Mr. Everett arrived - if they were still questioning him when Mr. Everett gets up there, even if they decide they're not going to use it, ofcourse the court has speculated you know, that he probably said the same things, he had denied it for 8 hours, he probably denied it the entire thing, obviously if he had said anything different they'd probably want to use it. But I think, but the court can not stop us from putting on this testimony your Honor. It is certainly relevant. Just because the state doesn't want to use whatever information my client may have given during that interview, can not, we object your Honor from preventing us from putting forth our defense in this case.
THE COURT: And your defense is that the police had tunnel vision?
PRICE: That's one of our defenses.
THE COURT: I'm not sure that that's a recognized defense.
DAVIDSON: It's not, it's -
PRICE: It's an original defense your Honor, there's nothing that has been recognized about this case.
THE COURT: Well, that's true.
FOGLEMAN: Your honor, in order to rebutt that, I guess what we're going to have to do is go through each person the police looked at, when they looked at 'em, and we will be here 6 months. This comes as an exclusion of a waste of time. It's a waste of time going into all this stuff, it's nonsense. The number - and your Honor, this is an important point, no matter who hires a person a lawyer, unless that person exercises his right to a lawyer, it doesn't mean the lawyer represents the person.
DAVIDSON: Your Honor, Mr. Echols has never hired me. The court appointed me, that makes no sense.
PRICE: That's absurd your Honor.
FOGLEMAN: And he accepted the appointment.
DAVIDSON: Yes, I did.
FOGLEMAN: Talking about Mr. Echols accepting your being appointed.
THE COURT: According to Mr. Everett, he never accepted the case either. He came over and got there at 6:20 or after, according to his recollection of it.
PRICE: The guy got paid $300.00 for accepting party.
THE COURT: Did he? He didn't testify to that, that's something I didn't know.
(mumbling)
THE COURT: Alright. I'm going to recess for lunch then I'll rule on it before lunch. The court will be in recess until 1:00.
(back in session)
DAVIDSON: Did you ever rule?
THE COURT: Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and let you do what you want, but I'm gonna let them cross examine on it too.
DAVIDSON: Ok.
(pause)
DAVIDSON: Ok, Mrs. Hutchison, I don't remember exactly where we left off so I'm going to start in again. Uh-
THE COURT: Not all over.
DAVIDSON: Not all over your Honor. Um - one area that we hadn't done uh - did your family move to Oregon at one point?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: When did you all move to Oregon?
HUTCHISON: It was in '92, about May of '92.
DAVIDSON: In May of '92?
HUTCHISON: Uh huh. Uh - '91. In '91.
DAVIDSON: And prior to moving to Oregon, did Damien have a girlfriend?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And who was that girlfriend?
HUTCHISON: Deanna Halcomb.
DAVIDSON: And uh, how long did you all live in Oregon?
HUTCHISON: Um - approximately 9 months.
DAVIDSON: And did you move your uh - belongings to Oregon?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh - did Damien uh - live with you in Oregon?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: How long did you live there?
HUTCHISON: We lived there 9 months, Damien was there about 2 months.
DAVIDSON: And did he come back uh - well, where did he go? You said he was there about 2 months - where did he go after that?
HUTCHISON: Um - he came back to live with Jack Echols.
DAVIDSON: Jack Echols?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh - that was his father by adoption?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And um - when did you all come back to Arkansas?
HUTCHISON: Um - February or March of '92.
DAVIDSON: Ok. And uh - did Damien have a knife collection?
HUTCHISON: Um - yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Um - did - when did he have this collection?
HUTCHISON: In Oregon.
DAVIDSON: In Oregon?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Did you all uh - does he still have that collection?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: What happened to the collection?
HUTCHISON: Uh - Joe Hutchison sold it whenever we moved back here.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Tell us a little bit about Damien and the way he dressed.
HUTCHISON: Um - he liked black. He started wearing black at the time he was seeing Deanna uh - 'cause she also liked the color black. He went through a skateboard phase where he wore real baggy jeans and baggy shirts and strange looking tennis shoes. And every little fad that came along, Damien had to try to dress like they were.
DAVIDSON: So, this was one of his later fads or phases, this dressing in black?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And the shoes that we earlier looked at that were like the shoes that he had - or the boots, uh - did he wear those boots that he had quite a bit?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Is that the only pair of boots he had?
HUTCHISON: Um - I think it was the only pair like that, yes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Um - what types of books and movies?
HUTCHISON: He likes horror movies, he likes Stephen King books, scary books, scary movies.
DAVIDSON: Did he read quite a bit?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Did you feel that um - Damien was a normal kid?
HUTCHISON: Um - he was a little bit different than the rest of the children because the way he dressed, but basically as far as the way he acted - yeah, he was pretty normal.
DAVIDSON: Did he listen to music?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: What type of music would he listen to?
HUTCHISON: Rock music.
DAVIDSON: And when you all moved back to Arkansas, did uh - Damien come and live with you at that time?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And did he live with you continuosly up through the date he was arrested?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Ok. (pause) Now. Are the exhibits in here? (pause) Ok, and would you view what's been introduced as state's exhibit number 85, can you identify that? (pause) Go ahead and take it out of the bag that's fine.
HUTCHISON: I believe I can.
DAVIDSON: And what is that?
HUTCHISON: It looks like my step-son's shirt.
DAVIDSON: Your step-son's shirt?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And uh - was this located in your house?
HUTCHISON: Um - probably so.
DAVIDSON: And where would it have been located?
HUTCHISON: In Michelle's closet.
DAVIDSON: In Michelle's closet, ok. And let me show you what has been introduced as state's exhibit number 77, have you ever seen this before?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Did Damien have a knife like this?
HUTCHISON: Like that? No, he had something similar to that.
DAVIDSON: Something similar to that. And uh - was that in his knife collection?
HUTCHISON: No.
DAVIDSON: Ok. How long had it been since you had seen the knife - the similar knife?
HUTCHISON: Probably about 4 years.
DAVIDSON: About 4 years, ok. Did Damien like to write?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Would he show you his writings?
HUTCHISON: Sometimes.
DAVIDSON: Did he uh - did he keep some of his things in a special place?
HUTCHISON: Um - he just had a notebook that he kept his writings in.
DAVIDSON: Ok. That's all your Honor.
DAVIS: Mrs. Hutchison, I'm going to have a few questions for ya, and if you don't understand my question or if you need me to repeat it or rephrase it, you just please ask me to do so, ok?
HUTCHISON: Ok.
DAVIS: And would you please be responsive to my questions, I'll rephrase it if you don't understand it and when I ask you one, would you respond to the question?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, Mrs. Hutchison, how would you describe the relationship between your son, Damien and Jason Baldwin?
HUTCHISON: They were very close friends.
DAVIS: Did you not in fact in a statement to the police officers describe them as very best friends?
HUTCHISON: Yes, probably did.
DAVIS: And in fact, you told the police officer that practically everyday they would spend 3 or 4 hours together everyday, is that right?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, you've testified and talked about what occurred on May the 5th, is that correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And you - yourself gave a statement to police officers on May the 12th, just one week after these little boys disappeared, true?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And on May the 12th, that was after all this that you testified to about your son being questioned, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: In fact, that would be after you had already told your son at the police station, "Not to say anything else because we had alibis", correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, on the 12th of May, do you remember giving the statement to Officer Ridge regarding the events of May 5th?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I don't.
DAVIS: Ok. Do you remember going up to the police station and talking with Officer Ridge and Officer Sudbury?
HUTCHISON: Um - I remember talking to Officer Sudbury, but I was thinking it was Officer Durham that was with him.
DAVIS: Ok. Your Honor, I would like to approach the witness, I'm not sure if I'll get to-
THE COURT: Well, just dig your way in.
DAVIS: I'd like to show you a document, I've highlighted the date on that. Does that appear to be a subject information form that was filled out about May the 12th of '93, regarding yourself?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And you wouldn't dispute that you were at the police station and giving this statement to Officer Ridge and Officer Sudbury on that date?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And that would have been less than one week since the boys have been discovered, correct?
HUTCHISON: Less than a week?
DAVIS: Yes ma'am, they were discovered on the 6th and this is the 12th.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, in that statement, did Officer Ridge ask you had there been anything unusual going on the week of the 5th, the 4th, 5th, and 6th, anything unusual happening that week? He asked you that, didn't he?
HUTCHISON: I'm sure he did.
DAVIS: Ok. And didn't in fact you tell him that on that week you separated from your husband and he packed up and moved out?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: And you told him that that happened on May 4th, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And on that date of May 4th, your husband, Joe Hutchison, you and him had gotten in an arguement and in a span of a couple of hours, he packed his stuff up and moved back to his mother's?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And you indicated that Damien was present that night when that had occurred?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, Mr. Davidson asked you if your son had been acting unusual during that time period, you told Officer Ridge that that on that particular evening that Damien had gotten very emotional, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: On the evening of May 4th, when that occurred.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And it was on May 5th when you took him - you said he had a doctor's appointment?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok, what time, where was that doctor's appointment at?
HUTCHISON: Regional Mental Health Center.
DAVIS: Ok. And what - for what purpose?
HUTCHISON: Um - Damien has been a patient there for awhile.
DAVIS: Ok. And does Damien, what does Damien get treated for at the mental health center?
HUTCHISON: Depression.
DAVIS: Ok. Does he have any other diagnosis that you're aware of?
HUTCHISON: Um - I don't know what it is.
DAVIS: Ok. Does he take medication?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And so he had been - he had been crying on the 4th and then you take him in for an examination on the 5th? Or to his doctor's appointment on the 5th.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And didn't you in fact tell the officers that your husband - you and your husband were separated for some two week period?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And he packed all his stuff up and moved out?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, you've indicated that your husband was there the next day and has been staying at the house and living at the house on the 5th?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Well, that seems a bit confusing if he packed up and moved out on the 4th - was he living there or had he moved out?
HUTCHISON: He was living there.
DAVIS: Ok. Did he bring all his stuff back on the 5th?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Had he moved out on the 4th?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And you say "No sir", you told - that was something that you told the officers on May 12th, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And how was it that something as big as separating from your husband and him packing his stuff up uh - did it just not happen? Did ya'll not separate? Did he not leave?
HUTCHISON: No sir, it happened.
DAVIS: Ok. Well, you told the officer on May 12th that it occurred on the evening of May 4th.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Did it not happen that date?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: What date did it happen?
HUTCHISON: May 9th.
DAVIS: Just 3 days before you talked to the police officers on the 12th? Ok. And so you talked to the officers on the 12th and you tell 'em that 8 days before, your husband and you had separated, but you made a mistake and you got confused, it was really only 3 days before you talked to the police officers?
HUTCHISON: I talked with the police officer on the one day and then when I went back the next time, I told him that it was the 9th.
DAVIS: Ok, and the next time when you came back and told him that it was the 9th, that was in September, correct? September of '93.
HUTCHISON: Uh - yes sir, I believe so.
DAVIS: Ok. But, in May, some 7 days after this incident, you told him that you separated from your husband on the 4th, is that correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: And it's your testimony under oath that you just got confused and didn't remember that it was just 3 days before, but that from May 12th when you talked with the officers until September, your mind became clearer and it actually was the 9th when you separated and your husband moved out?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Sometime between May and September, is when you changed your story, right?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Did something happen during that time period that cyrstalized or clarified your memory better than what it had been just 7 days after this incident?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Did you talk with other people?
HUTCHISON: I had talked with some other people, but that's not why I remembered.
DAVIS: And what was it that sparked your memory or caused you to remember?
HUTCHISON: My husband's birthday cake sitting on the table.
DAVIS: Ok. And it's your testimony that when you first told the officers that your husband wasn't there that he had moved out, that you were separated that you just didn't remember this birthday cake? And that you didn't remember that it was 3 days before, and not 10 days before?
HUTCHISON: Um hum, yes sir.
DAVIS: Now, you indicated as Mr. Davidson was asking you some questions, and I think these were your words, that his - Damien's dress was just one of those little fads that come along.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Well, his, he was into witchcraft too, correct?
HUTCHISON: I never saw him uh - do anything, that was - that had anything to do with witchcraft.
DAVIS: Ok. Did you ever read any of the books that he kept in his room?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, I'm sure I did.
DAVIS: Ok. Did you read the one uh - 'Witchcraft and Satanic Worship'?
HUTCHISON: Um - I don't know if I did or not.
DAVIS: Ok. And had you seen his book of shadows and one with the pentagram on it and the various incantations in there uh - had you seen that?
HUTCHISON: I believe I had.
DAVIS: Ok. And had you gone through it and looked at it?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, I think I did.
DAVIS: Ok. And at some point, how long was it before this incident occurred that you say his dress had changed?
HUTCHISON: Um - probably 2 years.
DAVIS: And when you say his dress had changed, had he started wearing this big, long, black trench coat?
HUTCHISON: Um - no sir.
DAVIS: Was he wearing this at about the time of the murders, was that something that he was frequently seen in?
HUTCHISON: Before the murders, yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And was he wearing all black as a usual attire? Or daily attire?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Well, you testified on direct that he wore mostly black, is that a fair and accurate statement?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And is that something that changed over these 2 years leading up to the time that he was arrested that his dress had changed, that he had gone from dressing one way to dressing that way?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And you mentioned that, I believe, he moved back from Oregon before ya'll did?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And wasn't that in fact as a result of him being hospitalized in Oregon?
HUTCHISON: I don't know if I'd say it was a result of that, but that was when he moved back, yes.
DAVIS: And involved in that incident in Oregon, of which he was hospitalized, did the police have to be called in that incident? Or were the police called?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIS: Ok. And in fact at that -
PRICE: Objection to relevance, your Honor.
DAVIDSON: May we approach the bench?
THE COURT: Alright.
(pause)
THE COURT: Boy, ya'll pop something new on me everyday. Well, I don't know, cross examine is the first I've heard of -
DAVIS: She testified that he came back, I think 7 months before they did and they stayed out in Oregon, I figured -
THE COURT: Nothing to do with him being hospitalized - what was he hospitalized for, just because I wanna know.
DAVIS: He was hospitalized for an incident in which he was uh - uh - the police had to be called, knives had to be taken away from him.
DAVIDSON: First of all, I don't think that's true, another thing is, if you get a conviction certainly, you can't use a prior past act to show that he acted in a conformity hereas, that does not show motive, opportunity, plan, preparation -
(mumbling interruption)
THE COURT: Ok. (pause) Objection Sustained.
PRICE: Thank you, your Honor.
DAVIS: Mrs. Hutchison, let me ask you this, was it October of '92 when your son moved back to Arkansas and ya'll stayed in Oregon?
HUTCHISON: It would have been September or October, yes.
DAVIS: Ok and as to clarify, in fact, on direct testimony you said '91, but it would have been the fall of '92, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIS: Ok. And would it be, were there some problems as far as relations between Damien and your husband at that time, or the person you were living with, I guess Mr. Hutchison, that caused Damien to move back to Arkansas?
HUTCHISON: I wouldn't say that's what caused him to move back, no.
DAVIS: Ok. But ya'll stayed there and he came back?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And as far as what, how he was conducting himself or where his beliefs were leading at that point, you were in Oregon and he was here.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Now, you gave us a description of what happened or what you said happened on the 5th, you said Damien woke up that morning, is that right?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And was it - what room did he sleep in the Tuesday night?
HUTCHISON: The middle bedroom.
DAVIS: Ok. Is that the one that you refer to as Michelle's bedroom?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Did Michelle ever sleep in Michelle's bedroom?
HUTCHISON: Once in awhile.
DAVIS: Ok. It strikes me as a little unusual, but why was it called Michelle's bedroom if Damien stayed in it?
HUTCHISON: Because it had mostly Michelle's stuff in there.
DAVIS: Ok. Well, where would Damien stay if he didn't stay in Michelle's bedroom?
HUTCHISON: When my husband worked nights, sometimes he would sleep in my bed, or on the couch.
DAVIS: Ok. And it's your testimony that this particular evening of the 5th or - yeah the 5th, that Michelle didn't stay in Michelle's bedroom. Michelle stayed on the couch and Damien stayed in Michelle's bedroom? Is that right?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIS: And that's also what happened Tuesday night, the 4th?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Did that happen on Thursday night, the 6th?
HUTCHISON: Probably.
DAVIS: Ok. So that would just be the usual course of things, Damien stayed in Michelle's bedroom?
HUTCHISON: Most of the time.
DAVIS: Now, as far as Damien's practice of witchcraft, you said that you didn't know a whole lot about it?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And he didn't talk alot about it to you?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. But you knew that he was involved in it?
HUTCHISON: I knew he was looking into it.
DAVIS: Ok, well, how long had he been looking into it?
HUTCHISON: I don't know for sure.
DAVIS: For a number of years, correct?
HUTCHISON: I think so.
DAVIS: Ok. Did it - was it your opinion that he was looking into it more closely as time went on or was it just this change of dress and these books in his room, was that just uh - a two year long passing fad?
HUTCHISON: I would still say it was passing.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, there was nothing unusual about going to visit the Sanders, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: And in fact, the Sanders that you referred to as far as going to visit on the afternoon of the 5th, those people would be considered I guess you and your husband's best friends?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: In fact, ya'll had lived with them for significant periods of time over the course of you lives, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Uh huh. And in fact when ya'll moved back from Oregon, ya'll moved in with them, right?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Now, in the statement that you gave to the officers - let me back up just a minute, you testified on direct that you stayed there no more than 30 minutes, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, something like that.
DAVIS: Ok. So I can, that would be accurate?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, when you talked to officers on May the 12th, and you talked with Detective Ridge and Detective Sudbury, you told them that you went to the Sanders somewhere around 5:30 or 6, didn't you?
HUTCHISON: I don't remember.
DAVIS: Ok. Your Honor, may I approach the witness and -
THE COURT: Yeah, go ahead.
DAVIS: Ok, it's at the bottom of page 14 - your statement, Officer Ridge says "Alright, when did that occur?" referring to your going to the Sanders' house, and your response is highlighted in orange. What did you tell him?
HUTCHISON: Around 5:30 or 6.
DAVIS: Ok. And that was at a time, just approximately 7 days after this incident, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: And so you went sometime around 5:30 or 6, and didn't stay anymore than 30 minutes, correct?
HUTCHISON: Something like that.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, you also testified on direct that that day you went by the pharmacy to pick up his medication?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: That you dropped off that prescription then you went back that afternoon, sometime in the afternoon period, and picked up his medication?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. You remember telling Officer Ridge and Officer Sudbury just a week after this that you picked up that medication Thursday morning, that you went after you let Domini off, you took Damien home, and you didn't go by the pharmacy?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I don't remember.
DAVIS: Ok. If it reflects that in the statement would you deny that's what you told Officer Ridge and Officer Sudbury?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, when was it that Damien changed his name?
HUTCHISON: When he was about 16.
DAVIS: Ok. And you were telling us that he changed his last name because that was his adoptive father's last name?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now what about that first name? Is that something, did ya'll have any contribution to that selection of first name?
HUTCHISON: In a way.
DAVIS: Ok. And how did that come about?
HUTCHISON: Because Damien wanted to become a Catholic priest.
DAVIS: Ok. Was that a fad that lasted very long?
HUTCHISON: Quite awhile.
DAVIS: Ok. Well, he did this at 16, how long did he continue his hopes for becoming a priest?
HUTCHISON: I would say 3 or 4 months.
DAVIS: Ok. And is that when - after that 3 or 4 months, his taste turned to the black clothing and that sort of thing?
HUTCHISON: Um - no sir, not at that time.
DAVIS: Now, if I've understood your testimony correctly, you said that you had not seen a knife like this in approximately 4 years?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, his knife collection - ya'll moved, when did ya'll move to Oregon?
HUTCHISON: In May of '92. I believe it's '92.
DAVIS: Ok. And he had a knife collection then?
HUTCHISON: No sir, not when we moved to Oregon.
DAVIS: Ok. So it's your testimony that he didn't start a knife collection until he was in Oregon?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok, and he never had one - got - if I understand correctly, then that would mean he never had a knife collection here in Arkansas, period.
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. So he started a knife collection in Oregon and then it was sold before you moved back?
HUTCHISON: No sir, it was sold after we moved back.
DAVIS: Ok. And so you brought the knife collection back and you sold them?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Were you personally involved in that?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Were you familar with what was in his knife collection and what knives he traded and had?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Where did he keep it?
HUTCHISON: My husband kept it in our bedroom.
DAVIS: Ok. And was that, did your husband all the time keep Damien's knife collection?
HUTCHISON: Most of the time.
DAVIS: Ok. Did that start after the incident out in Oregon?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Did he add to and trade and things like that with his knife collection?
HUTCHISON: Not in Oregon.
DAVIS: Do you know who they sold the knives to?
HUTCHISON: Uh - I think he sold them through an auction.
DAVIS: And were you there - you remember being at the auction where they were sold?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I wasn't there.
DAVIS: Have any reciepts reflecting?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I don't.
DAVIS: Ok. And that was - you say that was all left up to Joe?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. But to your knowledge, it was at an auction and there's no reciepts?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Just to make sure that I understand this, when you talked with Officer Ridge and them on the 12th, one of the things you used as a - kindly a uh - a focal point to determine what had occurred on the 5th was this event of separation with your husband on the 4th.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: And then, sometime in September, you tell the officers that no it wasn't - it was the 9th.
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Pass the witness.
DAVIDSON: So how did you remember that it was the 9th rather than the 4th, I'm not sure that I really understood that.
HUTCHISON: Because I remembered the birthday cake.
DAVIDSON: What birthday cake? Tell us about that.
HUTCHISON: Joe's birthday cake, his birthday is May 9th and that's the day we separated.
DAVIDSON: And you celebrasted it on May the 9th?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And you separated on that day also?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Is there something about that event that makes - causes you to remember that?
HUTCHISON: Joe's mother and I getting into an arguement and the cake being there.
DAVIDSON: And when you later saw that cake I believe you testified - what about that causes you to remember?
HUTCHISON: Just the fact that the cake was there 'cause I normally don't have a birthday cake there.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Now, when Damien uh - when you all went to uh - pick up a prescription, did you later go and get a copy of his uh - pharmacudical records?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Now, I'm handing you a document, could you identify that?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: And tell us what it is.
HUTCHISON: It's the record of his uh - prescriptions.
DAVIDSON: And where was that obtained?
HUTCHISON: Marion Discount Pharmacy.
DAVIDSON: Is that where you all got his medicine?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Is that where you did business?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: And did you indeed go to Marion Discount Pharmacy on May the 5th of 1993?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
DAVIDSON: Does that record also reflect a prescription on May the 5th of 1993?
HUTCHISON: Yes.
FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, we don't have any objection as long as it's understood that that doesn't reflect when the prescription was picked up. Only when the prescription was dropped off.
DAVIDSON: Your Honor, I think the document will speak for itself and that's something that they can certainly question about - the document will speak for itself as to when the prescription was filled. But not Mr. Fogleman -
FOGLEMAN: But what the document doesn't speak is, it's just got a date -
THE COURT: Are you objecting to that? Of course you could call the pharmacist and ask.
DAVIDSON: (talking over) You can call the pharmacist.
(pause)
FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, we would object to that 'cause it could give a misleading impression to the jury because I think that the time in dispute is when that was picked up, I don't think there is any dispute that a prescription was dropped off on the 5th. The question was when it was picked up and that has no relevance or any evidentuary value at all regarding that.
THE COURT: Does either of you know if the pharmacist can uh - enlighten us on that?
FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, I talked with the pharmacist -
DAVIDSON: Your Honor, I object to him saying -
FOGLEMAN: I'm not going to say what he said -
DAVIDSON: - Saying anything.
FOGLEMAN: I won't say what he said.
DAVIDSON: Can we approach the bench?
THE COURT: Alright.
(pause)
THE COURT: Well, you can get from any business, you know, an exception, I guess -
FOGLEMAN: I talked with the pharmacist, your Honor, and he said his record would not indicate when a prescription was picked up - often times it's when a prescription is dropped off on the form, and it may be the next day, it may be the same day, it may be 2 days later, and there's no way for him to tell when it was picked up.
DAVIDSON: Well, we gotta call the man up 'cause the impression you give up there was that -
THE COURT: Well, I mean, I can't let the record in without having a fair objective.
DAVIDSON: Are you objecting on this record?
FOGLEMAN: Well, not with the understanding it doesn't indicate when it was picked up.
DAVIDSON: It shows when it was dropped off, if that's the only -
THE COURT: It shows when it was prepared.
DAVIDSON: The document speaks for itself.
FOGLEMAN: But the document doesn't speak to -
THE COURT: You can't get the document in without the pharmacist, so questionable if you want to stipulate as to what they want or do you want to call the pharmacist?
(mumbling)
FOGLEMAN: Well hey, if ya'll want to stipulate he can't testify - he can't say when it was picked up then we won't make him come up here.
THE COURT: In otherwords, you're saying that he - his testimony would be that he didn't have any idea when it was picked up, that that reflects -
FOGLEMAN: That's what he told me.
THE COURT: - the day when the prescription was made.
FOGLEMAN: Or atleast dropped off or made or it may have been prepared or it may have even been filled that day, but that has no relation as when it's picked up. Huh?
PRICE: (mumbling)
FOGLEMAN: I mean, your Honor, we don't have any objection as long as it's - they're trying to put it forth to suggest that it was picked up that day but that's not what the document, the document doesn't go to that about when it was picked up.
DAVIDSON: It goes to when it was filled, your Honor.
FOGLEMAN: Right.
THE COURT: That's right.
FOGLEMAN: It has no relation of when it was picked up.
DAVIDSON: Well, that's what this testimony is about and they can oversee -
FOGLEMAN: Well, as long as it's understood that this document only goes to when it's filled and not when it's picked up.
DAVIDSON: Well, that's for them to understand.
FOGLEMAN: Well, if you're not willing -
DAVIDSON: We can't get up -
FOGLEMAN: - call the pharmacist.
DAVIDSON: We can't get up there and every piece of evidence - we didn't do that to you - every piece of evidence say "Just so they understand" -
FOGLEMAN: Well, if you're not willing to stipulate that this only goes to when it's filled and not when it's picked up, then you might as well bring the pharmacist in.
(mumbling)
(open court)
DAVIDSON: Now, when you all went over to the Sanders that evening uh, -
(tape flipped)
DAVIDSON: - talked with you about that?
HUTCHISON: A little bit.
DAVIDSON: And what kind of difference did you discern out of that?
HUTCHISON: What I got from Wicca was just suppose to be a love of nature, and that was the most that was ever explained about it - that we ever talked about it.
DAVIDSON: And uh - was Damien into any kind of witchcraft?
HUTCHISON: Well, if that's what they call Wicca. But my understanding is that it's a religion.
DAVIDSON: Ok. Now, you said earlier when Damien changed his name to Damien Echols that it was, when Mr. Davis asked you about that, and you said it was when uh - he was aspiring to be a priest, is that correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Tell us about that and why that name? Did you all discuss it first of all?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Well, tell us about that.
HUTCHISON: Damien was going to school to become a Catholic priest. And he was baptized in the name of Father Damien, who was a priest who took care of lepers until he died with the disease himself.
DAVIDSON: And uh - did your son seem impressed with that?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir, he did.
DAVIDSON: And you said he was studying to be a priest, what was he doing?
HUTCHISON: He was going to school.
DAVIDSON: Uh - what do they call that in the Catholic church, do you know?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I sure don't.
DAVIDSON: Um - were you um - were you a catholic?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIDSON: Is this something that he did on his own?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Did he have books about it at the time?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Keep books in his room about that at the time?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIDSON: Did you feel like that was one of his phases?
HUTCHISON: Not at the time.
DAVIDSON: Looking back on it now, what do you think?
HUTCHISON: It was just one of his phases.
DAVIDSON: That's all, your Honor.
DAVIS: Now, back when - during the time between the time when the children disappeared and the time Damien was arrested back then, he had certain tattoos across the knuckles of his hand, correct?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: It was spelled, it had E-V-I-L across his hand, evil?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And he had a pentagram tattooed right up here on his chest, didn't he?
HUTCHISON: Not to my knowledge.
DAVIS: Alright, you hadn't never seen that?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok and if the police, if in the police report at the time they did a subject description and they mark on there a pentagram on the chest area - you just hadn't ever observed that about your son?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Never seen that. Were you aware of a tattoo that he had right up here in between his index finger and his thumb on this hand?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. And how long - did he get that while he was studying to be a priest?
HUTCHISON: No sir, I don't think so.
DAVIS: Was it afterwards?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. What about the evil tattoo across his knuckles, did that come after he quit doing the study to be a priest?
HUTCHISON: Yes sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Now, you indicated to Mr. Davidson in the way you remembered that it was the 9th and not the 4th was because of this birthday cake, when you talked with Officer Ridge on the 12th of May, you never once mentioned anything about your husband having a birthday on the 9th or about any birthday cake that was there on the 9th, the same day that you separated from your husband, did you?
HUTCHISON: No sir.
DAVIS: Ok. Pass the witness.
DAVIDSON: Nothing further, your Honor.
THE COURT: Alright, you may stand down and call your next witness.