Photograph of Charles Mamou, courtesy of ©manfredbaumann.com

A fax cover sheet addressed to Assistant District Attorney Lyn McClellan and dated September 24, 1999, along with an HPD officer’s handwritten caller ID records were seen for the first time by Charles Mamou in 2020, over twenty years after the Houston Police Department and District Attorney’s office had access to them.  The cover sheet and phone records were not shared with Mamou at trial, and could have assisted in the investigation as well as discredited the testimony of two of the prosecution’s key witnesses.  In a case without physical evidence, those witnesses were critical. The jury that found Charles Mamou guilty and sentenced him to death never saw the documents, and they were only recently obtained by Mamou’s advocates.

Charles Mamou was sentenced to die in 1999, not long after this fax is dated, for the kidnapping and murder of Mary Carmouche.  Mamou has always maintained his innocence and describes fleeing a drug deal gone wrong in a car that didn’t belong to him – Carmouche was in the backseat – and returning to an apartment complex in Houston, Texas, where he was staying.  Mamou lived in Louisiana and was in Texas, in most part, for a drug deal.  According to Mamou, he last saw Carmouche alive and in the parking lot of the apartment complex, along with several other individuals, two of whom would end up being key witnesses for the prosecution, claiming they were at home in bed, and never saw Mamou after the drug deal – also claiming they did not make or receive phone calls that night.

The phone records – one of two pieces of actual evidence in the case – were never shared with Mamou or the jury.  The other piece of evidence that Mamou and the jury never heard about was a rape kit that was collected, which included the collection of ‘trace evidence’ and ‘hairs’.  In a case with no fingerprints at the scene of the body, no footprints, no witnesses, no weapon – a rape kit and phone records are the next best thing.  The prosecution knew about both.  The jury and Mamou knew about neither. Not only did the prosecution know about the rape kit – they also told the jury Mamou sexually assaulted the victim.

The HPD investigator’s notes include identifying notations next to the phone numbers.  The victim was last seen alive on the evening of December 6, 1998, early morning of December 7, 1998.  The key witness, Howard Scott, lived at the apartment complex Mamou said he drove the car to. These are Scott’s caller ID records from that night, as written by an HPD investigator that went to Scott’s apartment on December 8, 1998.

11:19 p.m., Oretha Gray;
11:25 p.m., Sun Suites;
11:46 p.m., Emily Griggs;
11:48 p.m., Meri Eubanks;
12:14 a.m., payphone;
12:19 a.m., M.E. Brinson – Shawn’s mother;
1:54 a.m., Meri Eubanks;
2:37 a.m., wireless [WRITER’S NOTE:  the phone number listed at 2:37 is identified in HPD’s file as belonging to another key witness, Samuel Johnson];
3:12 a.m., M.E. Brinson – Shawn calls for Howard;
3:43 a.m., call notes.

Mamou could have used this information in his defense, and investigators may have had an opportunity to pursue the location of the wireless phone call made at 2:37 a.m. from a cell phone used by Samuel Johnson, a witness who testified he was home in bed and didn’t talk to anyone that night. Johnson’s contradicting statement and testimony are sufficient reason to pursue the origin and purpose of the 2:37 a.m. phone call for anyone trying to find answers in a murder investigation.

Charles Mamou did not live in Houston. All of the key witnesses did, and Samuel Johnson also worked for Orkin at the time, testifying that his area was in the southwest area of Houston. Although it was often reported that the victim was found near some abandoned houses, she was actually found in what detectives described as a hard to find location in a suburban neighborhood in the southwest area of Houston in the backyard of a house that was for sale – not some abandoned houses.

When the HPD investigator went to Howard Scott’s apartment on Tuesday, December 8, 1998, the investigator was actually hoping to arrest Mamou. They knew he was there that morning from Howard Scott’s wife, and they knew Mamou had been involved in the drug deal that Mary Carmouche had last been seen at. Investigators didn’t find Mamou, but they wrote down Scott’s caller ID records and transported Scott to HPD that day to make a written statement. Not only is that documented in HPD’s case file, Detective Novak also testified regarding Howard Scott’s written statement that day.

That original statement from Howard Scott is nowhere to be found. It is not in the HPD case file, and according to the District Attorney’s office, they don’t have it either. I was told by HPD, that ‘everything doesn’t always makes it into the file’. The following day, police brought Scott and his wife back to HPD and took written statements again on Wednesday, December 9, 1998. Both of Robin Scott’s statements are available, but Howard Scott’s original statement is missing.

I tried to speak to Scott in 2019, but he refused to talk to me. He has spoken to other people over the years, and his statements are inconsistent throughout. The most recent of which, in 2019, includes a physical description of Carmouche from that night, and seeing Samuel Johnson, Charles Mamou and Mary Carmouche all at the apartment complex at the same time – a complete reversal from his testimony, in which he claimed he was home in bed and did not see Samuel Johnson or Charles Mamou after the drug deal, and his phone did not ring. Howard Scott described seeing Samuel Johnson, Charles Mamou, Mary Carmouche, and Kenneth Duplechan all alive and at the apartment complex parking lot after the drug deal.

The jury never heard that. The prosecutor who, according to the the fax cover sheet, was sent Scott’s caller ID records on September 24, 1999, listened to his witness testify two weeks later on October 7, 1999, about going to bed between 11 and midnight, and about how the phone was ringing prior to that, as he sat with ‘Shawn’ and Ken. Scott told the jury there were ‘no more phone calls’ after he went to bed. Neither the jury nor Mamou are ever told ‘Shawn’, the man Scott said he was talking to in his apartment before he went to bed between 11 and 12, called Scott’s apartment at 12:19 a.m., and again at 3:12 a.m., and that Scott’s phone didn’t stop ringing until 3:43 a.m. Although Howard Scott has consistantly contradicted himself for twenty years, and his first statement is missing, he was a key witness in the case against Mamou.

Samuel Johnson, the driver in the drug deal gone wrong, who fled the alley without Mamou, testified he went straight home to bed and spoke to no one, never seeing Mamou or Carmouche again, not seeing or speaking to anyone that night. According to the HPD investigator’s notes, Samuel Johnson called Howard Scott’s apartment at 2:37 a.m., from a wireless phone. At that time in history, landlines were frequently used for phone calls made from a person’s residence, and wireless calls were more likely to be made when away from home. Mamou never had an opportunity to point out to the jury that Johnson’s phone made a call to Howard Scott’s apartment nor was he able to investigate the location of the call’s origin. The prosecution did not share the available information with the jury.

‘Ken’ who Howard Scott mentioned was sitting in his living room in his testimony, has since been interviewed, although there is nothing in HPD’s file to indicate that anyone involved in trying to find Carmouche’s killer ever interviewed him during HPD’s ‘investigation’. In 2019 Kenneth Duplechan told an investigator he saw Charles Mamou, Howard Scott, Samuel Johnson and Shawn Eaglin in the apartment complex parking lot that night – along with the blue Lexus Mamou fled the drug deal in. That statement contradicts everything the jury was told. Kenneth Duplechan also stated he stayed in the parking lot talking to Howard Scott and Charles Mamou after Samuel Johnson drove away. The jury never heard any of that, but the phone records reveal one name coming up twice on Scott’s phone that night – Meri Eubanks. Meri Eubanks does appear to know Kenneth Duplechan, but Eubanks and Duplechan will not respond to inquiries from me. Although the HPD investigator is the individual who wrote down the name Meri Eubanks in his notes as a caller to Scott’s apartment, there are no records of anyone at HPD interviewing Eubanks in their efforts to locate Carmouche’s killer.

There were other phone calls made to the apartment that night that could have been investigated, but according to police files were not, and Mamou was not aware of them at the time, so he was unable to pursue them himself.

The prosecution also knew about actual physical evidence that was collected as part of a rape kit. They did not share what they learned with the jury or Mamou. That information has been kept from Mamou for over twenty years.

On July 8, 1999, two months before Mamou’s trial, an investigator for the District Attorney, Al Rodriguez, contacted HPD and asked them to process a rape kit.

On July 12, 1999, the results were back, indicating that no semen was detected, trace evidence and hairs existed and had been collected.

During the trial, the medical examiner testified at length about the procedures during an autopsy as well as reviewing the autopsy report itself. At no point throughout the entire trial, or in the twenty years since, was Charles Mamou or the jury told a rape kit existed. Quite the opposite. The rape kis was so well not documented, that in 2007 a private investigator looking for more evidence had to report back to Mamou that he could not find more evidence obtained by the medical examiner.

Last year, on October 30, 2019, after I had gone to HPD and the District Attorney’s office requesting the results of the rape kit and being told they don’t keep that kind of information, I contacted the Harris County Medical examiner looking for the information. It was confirmed for me at that time that the rape kit had been collected at the time of the autopsy in spite of the medical examiner neglecting to include that information in his autopsy report and testimony.

On November 19, 2019, I was able to obtain the results to the actual rape kit, noting no semen found and trace evidence collected.

The information wasn’t just kept from Mamou and the jury, the prosecutor also told the jury that a sexual assault took place, but failed to share with the jury or the defense that no semen was found .

A lot of things were told to the jury to steer them in the direction of a guilty verdict. The day after Carmouche went missing, Mamou was with his cousin when he picked up some sunglasses that he had dropped during his stay in Houston. Without surrounding information, the sunglasses became tied to the victim in the courtroom and later in news reports. It was never pointed out for the jury that the glasses were found approximately five miles from the body.

There were a lot of things not pointed out for the jury. Mamou never saw the original video statement of his cousin, Terrence Dodson, who told jurors that Mamou confessed to him. In 2019, I sent Mamou a transcript of the original statement. Although Dodson testified Mamou confessed to him over days, partially in person and partially over the phone, HPD investigators had recorded Dodson originally telling them Mamou called him from Louisiana ‘before day’ on Tuesday, December 8, 1998, and told him everything. Investigators knew, while they were listening to Dodson’s statement, Mamou had not left Houston until Tuesday at 1:30 p.m. on a bus. The interview took place on Wednesday, December 9, 1998.

Dodson’s testimony not only differed from his statement, but Mamou never saw Dodson again after the morning of Monday, December 7, 1998. He could not have confessed to him in person as he testified, nor could he have confessed in one phone call from Louisiana before day on December 8, 1998, as he said in his original statement because Mamou did not leave Houston on a bus headed to Louisiana until Tuesday afternoon at 1:30.

The jury also never saw a letter Terrence Dodson wrote to Mamou a month after Carmouche was murdered, stating he was glad Mamou didn’t tell him anything.

In 2019 it was noted in the HPD case files linked to Mamou’s case that biological evidence was signed out. I inquired at HPD, the Property Room, the Homicide Department, and the District Attorney’s office regarding why the evidence was signed out.

At the HPD Records Department, I was told they didn’t know the answer, and I should contact the Property Room, the District Attorney’s office, and the Medical Examiner. 

At the District Attorney’s office, I was told the case was currently ‘closed’.  There would be no current requests for evidence from them because no one was working it, and the files themselves were in storage – the case was inactive. 

At the HPD Property Room, which was where the biological evidence was signed out from – I was told there is protocol in place, and in order to find out why the biological evidence was signed out, I would need to go to Homicide and speak with the investigator on the case.

At Homicide, I was told it was a ‘cold case’ and there was no active investigator on the case, I would need to talk to the person in charge of cold cases.

The cold case investigator wasn’t in and never returned my phone call.

I later received a phone call from D. Wilker in Homicide.  I was told ‘only the Property Division could answer my questions’.  Of note – the Property Division is where I had originally gone and was told that due to ‘protocol’, I would need to go to Homicide.

During that phone conversation, I was also told Ms. Wilker would reach out to the Property Division to see if she could get an answer for me, but she couldn’t make any promises.  In addition, she informed me ‘we are mandated to test every piece of evidence’, suggesting that the evidence was taken out for testing.   Ms. Wilker also suggested an investigator could have requested the material be checked out, but as I had already been told – there was no investigator on the case at that time.  I was told she would get back in touch with me after she reached out to the Property Division.

After a couple weeks and no contact from Ms. Wilker – I called her.  Ms. Wilker told me the rape kit results I was looking for at that time, which I later found without her assistance, were ‘irrelevant’.   I was told the defense had every piece of evidence they needed to have.  The ‘window of opportunity’ for finding out anything was closed.  And, finally, yes, the evidence had been checked out in 2019 and had been in the possession of Mary K. Childs-Henry, but it was now back where it belonged.  It had been checked out for ‘cataloging purposes’. 

I then asked Ms. Wilker if she considered the matter closed, and she told me she did.

After that phone call I wrote a letter to Internal Affairs and the Chief of Police, as ‘cataloging’ two pieces of twenty year old biological evidence didn’t seem logical, and I had just been told the rape kit results that were never shared with Mamou were ‘irrelevant’, which also seemed illogical considering evidence was collected .  

The Houston Police Department responded, telling me no one had done anything wrong. “In your letter, you inquired about procedures for removing evidence regarding Mr. Mamou’s case. The District Attorney is the only person that can authorize any type of evidence to be released for any reason.  There are procedures in place for care, custody and control of evidence that is stored in the Property Room. You may reach the Harris County District Attorney’s Office at ….”

As of this date, it remains unclear why the biological evidence was signed out in 2019. 

Charles Mamou has spent over two decades on death row and is awaiting an execution date. In a case without evidence shared with the jury, the prosecution painted a picture. In the painting, the jury was told Mamou sexually assaulted the victim and murdered individuals in previous unsolved murder cases. They were shown autopsy photos of another murder victim, from another crime, and heard the impact statements from the victim’s family in that crime.

One might argue with HPD that evidence is relevant. It’s relevant to victims and their families, and it is relevant to defendants. Charles Mamou’s little sister recently described the last Christmas Eve she shared with her brother over twenty years ago.  She and her family spent the day at her Uncle White’s house in Lafayette.  Their uncle had a house big enough for everybody, and his gumbo took all day and night to cook, but was worth the wait. 

When the family got home that night, they could barely get through the living room because Mamou and his friends had been busy picking up gifts while everyone was gone.  The kids weren’t allowed to open anything until morning, but their mom did allow them to set off the fireworks Mamou had brought home.  There were so many, Mamou’s sister remembers the sky turning pink, and she remembers seeing two of Mamou’s children that night and the step kids he treated like his own. 

Anyone with information regarding this case can contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net.

 Photo, courtesy of ©manfredbaumann.com

TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU:
Charles Mamou #999333
Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53
3872 South FM 350
Livingston, TX 77351

You can also reach him through jpay.com.

Houston’s Police Chief, Art Acevedo, recently received cheers from protestors, “We will march as a department with everybody in this community.  I will march until I can’t stand no more.”

Charles Mamou has lived on Death Row for over twenty years for a case built by the Houston Police Department and prosecuted by Harris County, Texas.  Mamou is out of appeals, and despite what that means for a man on death row, the Houston Police Department is not interested in addressing any mishandling of his case.    A few short months ago, I was ‘dismissed’ by the Houston Police Department when I tried to obtain answers.  I was told by Ms. Wilker at HPD that what I was looking for was ‘irrelevant’ and the ‘window of opportunity’ to obtain the information was ‘closed’. 

I tried to explain to Ms. Wilker during our several conversations that it was relevant and what I was looking for, rape kit results, were significant because the prosecutor told the jury Charles Mamou sexually assaulted the victim.  Ms. Wilker wouldn’t acknowledge the importance of the information. 

I was able to obtain the rape kit results without the help of HPD or the Harris County District Attorney’s office.  As it turns out, the results revealed the D.A. knew prior to trial that while they were accusing Mamou of sexual assault, there was no semen found.   They also learned before the trial and from those results that trace evidence existed in the case.  They never told Mamou, and they didn’t tell him a few months ago when I was requesting their help in the matter.  Again, HPD’s position, according to Ms. Wilker, the rape kit results are irrelevant and the window of opportunity to obtain that information is closed. 

Legally, Mamou’s case has been rubber-stamped and through the Texas process – he will be executed in the near future.  But this is what people should know when the execution takes place.  I didn’t just go to HPD looking for rape kit results.  There is a lot more the jury never knew in the Mamou case in addition to a rape kit and the results from it.

In 2019, twenty years after Mamou’s death sentence began, the case file states ‘biological evidence’ was signed out on two different occasions.  Mamou, who has always maintained his innocence, is going to be executed so it seems reasonable he should know why biological evidence was being signed out in his case.  Coincidentally or not, the employee who signed for both items has been written about on several occasions in the Houston Chronicle for issues related to mishandling of evidence.  The employee also worked in the HPD lab back in 1998 when the crime occurred, and it appears someone that looks strikingly like that employee is in Mamou evidence photographs from the time.   For all those reason, I also inquired at HPD as to why the evidence was signed out. 

I was told by HPD to ask the District Attorney’s office and the HPD Property Room, which I did.   The District Attorney’s office told me they had not requested any evidence to be tested, the file was not active.  The Property Room told me to go to Homicide and ask the investigator working the case.  Homicide told me no one was working the case.  My question came full circle back to HPD, and I was told by Ms. Wilker in a phone conversation that the evidence was signed out and in the possession of Mary K. Childs-Henry at one time, but it was ‘now back where it belonged’.  Not satisfied, I asked if she considered the matter closed – she responded she did.

After that phone call, I wrote to Internal Affairs and copied Chief Art Acevedo, hoping to address why evidence in the Mamou case would be signed for if there was no detective working the case and the District Attorney did not request it.  HPD responded via a letter dated December 17, 2019.  “The incident described by you does not support an allegation of misconduct on the part of a member of the Houston Police Department.  There is no allegation described by you that would initiate an investigation.”  It went on to say, “The District Attorney is the only person that can authorize any type of evidence to be released for any reason.”

And so – no one needs to explain why biological evidence in a capital murder case gets signed out. 

It doesn’t end with an undisclosed rape kit, or undisclosed trace evidence or having to not account for removing evidence in a capital murder that resulted in a death sentence.

The case was built from the ground up on a one-time suspect telling police that Mamou confessed to him.   HPD investigators were aware when they were recording that suspect’s statement that what he was describing couldn’t have taken place the way described.  The witness, Terrence Dodson, said Mamou confessed to him in a one phone call ‘confession’ from Louisiana on the previous day, Tuesday morning ‘before day’.  The police didn’t stop him at that point. At the very time he was making this statement, police were taking a statement in another room from a man who said Mamou was in Houston, Texas, on Tuesday morning, and that man drove Mamou to the bus stop on Tuesday in the afternoon, around 1:30. 

That wasn’t all.  Police knew Mamou was in Houston on Tuesday because the man who was recording the statement, Det. Novak, had actually spoken to the woman whose apartment Mamou had slept in on Monday night and that detective also obtained a warrant in Houston on Tuesday morning as police tried to arrest Mamou at that apartment located in Houston.  They missed Mamou, who was later dropped off at the bus stop by the witness in the other room at HPD.  The HPD interviewer, Novak, also notarized the statement of the man in the next room who said he drove Mamou to the bus stop.  Novak was also the one who spoke to the woman whose apartment Mamou slept at and where he was located on Tuesday morning.

If that wasn’t enough, the ‘star’ witness also clearly told police Mamou was planning on taking a bus from Louisiana to Houston on Tuesday and had asked the witness to pick him up at the bus station.  Again – detectives knew Mamou was not in Louisaina on Tuesday morning and they also knew he actually took a bus from Houston to Louisiana on Tuesday – the exact opposite of what the witness was describing.

That witness’ testimony later changed at trial, and he described a confession that took place over days, over the phone and in person, even though Mamou never  saw that man again after Monday morning.  Mamou never saw the interview, and was unaware of the discrepancies until last year.

There is more. 

Investigators, when they went to the apartment that Tuesday morning to talk to the resident there,  Howard Scott, they wrote down every single one of the phone calls on his caller I.D. from the night of the crime.  That information was never shared with Mamou, but would have discredited two of the state’s witnesses who testified they were in bed sleeping and not using their phones.  Howard Scott said his phone simply stopped ringing between 11 and 12 when he went to bed. When asked on the stand if it was because it was unplugged, he said no.   It was because it simply stopped ringing. 

An HPD investigator faxed the phone records to the District Attorney during the trial and before that testimony.  The District Attorney didn’t pull his witness to the side during his testimony or in any way indicate the witness was lying.  There was also at least one phone call that went out of the apartment that night according to the caller I.D. of Yellow Cab. 

Included in the fax HPD sent to the D.A. were the phone calls placed to the apartment by another suspect, Samuel Johnson.   Samuel Johnson also testified he was in bed sleeping and had not contacted anyone or made any calls to Howard Scott – whose caller ID said he did.  Again, the District Attorney did not ask his witness to tell the truth, or ask for an opportunity to speak to his witness on the side and explain to him that he needed to tell the truth on the stand. 

What’s  even more important about Samuel Johnson’s phone call – it was made from a cell phone.  In 1998, it would be common for people to use their landline for phone calls from their residence and a cell phone if they were not at home.  Unfortunately, those phone records were never shared with Mamou, and he didn’t know they existed until recently.  The opportunity to trace that phone call is gone.

There is more about that Tuesday and the police talking to Howard and Robin Scott.  Police drove them both to HPD to get their statements. Robin Scott’s statement from that day is in the file, Howard Scott’s is not  – even though it is well documented that Howard Scott was taken to HPD on Tuesday, December 8, 1998, for a statement.  In addition, Detective Novak testified he took a written statement from Scott when he went to HPD that day, and Howard himself has since told an investigator that HPD would not let him and his wife leave the police department that day until their statements matched.

As if that wasn’t enough.   Detective Novak reopened an investigation into an unsolved murder in Houston from months earlier during the trial. What’s found in that file, isn’t much, but there is a witness statement in there that describes an individual in a bar, even describes how he was dressed, who left the bar with the victim. He also describes someone coming in a short time later saying the victim had been shot.  That statement  was never shared with the jury. Rather – the ‘man in the bar’, Joseph Melancon, testified at Mamou’s trial.  His testimony did not match any of his earlier recorded accounts, but the jury didn’t know that, and Mamou got accused of the unsolved crime.  The jury never heard the witness statement describing Melancon leaving with the victim, nor did they get to hear any defense from Mamou.  Mamou was not charged with that crime, although he is listed as charged.   The jury got to see the dead man’s autopsy photos and hear from his grieving family members though.

That is what took place in the hands of Harris County and the Houston Police Department.   If you try to inquire with them regarding what took place, you may be told what you want to know is “irrelevant” and “the window of opportunity is closed”, but I would be happy to share with you what I have. 

When Charles Mamou gets executed, his parents will most likely be offered the opportunity to watch, but it won’t be on camera for the world to see. 

Chief Acevedo and the Harris County prosecutors always have the power to do the right thing and the window of opportunity is never closed.  It is more open now than it has ever been.  

“Compassion takes courage,” Mamou wrote me recently.  Will the powers that be have the courage to do the right thing – or keep insisting some window is closed?

All posts and details of this case, including phone records that were not shared with the defense, a letter from the ‘key witness’ stating he didn’t know anything, and how Mamou was even accused of an unsolved murder during his trial can be found here.  Anyone with information regarding this case can contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net. There is also a facebook page dedicated to sharing the truth. Share his story.

TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU:
Charles Mamou #999333
Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53
3872 South FM 350
Livingston, TX 77351
Mamou can also be contacted through JPay via email, but please include your mailing address if you contact him this way, as he can only respond through the mail.

“The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to convict, but to see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the secreting of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly reprehensible.” – Canons of Professional Ethics of the American Bar Association

Harris County sent Charles Mamou to death row in 1999 in a case with no eye-witnesses or physical identifying evidence at the scene, a case built on the testimony of a witness who said Charles Mamou confessed to him.  Other than that statement, which was recorded and contradicts facts and the witness’ own testimony, questions remain. 

Why was Mamou never told a rape kit had been collected?  Why was Mamou never given phone records revealing activities of other possible suspects that night?  Why wasn’t Mamou told one of those phone calls was from a ‘cell phone’ and could have possibly been traced?   Why is a key witness’ original statement not in the file?  Why was there no documentation of another ‘possible suspect’s’ interviews in the file?  Why was biological evidence in the case signed out of HPD’s Property Room last year, twenty years later?

Possibly the biggest question of all – was the case against Charles Mamou built to prosecute, rather than see justice done?  There wasn’t ‘one’ issue, but many, and information Mamou could have used to defend himself wasn’t shared with him.

HPD Case File 157191298, Supplement 11, “D.A.’s Office is requesting that the rape kit obtained by the Harris County Morgue at time of the autopsy be processed through our crime lab.”  No one told Mamou a rape kit had been collected.  For two decades – he never knew.  Mamou is out of appeals and waiting an execution date, and still, he has never had this information shared with him by Harris County.  He has this information now because advocates who believe in his innocence located it.

The HPD case file went on to say, “Forward the findings of the rape kit examination to D.A. Investigator Al Rodriquez.”  That was in 1999.  In 2019 when I asked an HPD employee where the rape kit results were, I was told “they are irrelevant.”

During the trial the prosecutor assured the jury Mamou had sexually assaulted the victim.  It was not mentioned that ‘no semen’ was found in the rape kit which included oral swabs.  It was not mentioned in the autopsy report.  It was not mentioned in the medical examiner’s testimony.  There was not a word said to indicate a rape kit had been collected. 

While asking the jury to sentence Mamou to death, the prosecution stated, “And he takes her to Lynchester.  He marches her to the back, and he makes her commit oral sodomy, makes her suck his penis.  Imagine that, ladies and gentleman.”  Volume 24, Page 38

Mamou wasn’t charged with sexual assault, but the prosecution learned something when they received the results of the rape kit.   Through the rape kit, ‘trace evidence’ was collected from the victim, including ‘hairs’ collected from her shirt and fingernail scrapings.  This information, as well, was not shared with Mamou and was just discovered last year by advocates.

Regarding the night of the crime, Mamou has admitted to his role in the drug deal and the subsequent shooting – and even to fleeing in a car that held Mary Carmouche.  He says he drove back to the location where he was staying and all the other parties involved in the drug deal were located there.  That is the last place he says he saw Mary Carmouche.  The things he describes seeing in the apartment complex parking lot have been supported by evidence as well as statements the jury never saw.  The prosecutor claimed Mamou left the drug deal and drove Carmouche to a suburban neighborhood where he sexually assaulted and murdered her.

The Houston Police Department had in their possession something that would have helped Mamou support the events as he described them, but Mamou never saw this information.  A fax cover sheet indicates HPD sent this information to Lyn McClellen, the prosecutor, while the trial was underway.  HPD had their own handwritten phone records from the apartment Mamou said he drove to.  All of the people he said were out and about that night – had been communicating with that apartment up until 3:43 a.m. that Sunday night.   The phone records indicated they were not sleeping as they testified.

When the prosecution’s witness, the resident of the apartment, testified in court that he went to sleep at 11:00 or 12:00 and his phone stopped ringing – the prosecution didn’t stop the proceedings or ask to speak to their witness on the side or get clarification.  The defense specifically asked –

Q.  And at what time do you go to bed?
A.  I went right after that, I guess about 11:00 or 12:00.
Q.  I’m sorry?
A.  About 11:00 or 12:00, something like that.

Q.  So are you awoken by telephone calls even after you go to bed?
A.  No, sir, no more phone calls.   After awhile it wasn’t no more phone calls. 
(Volume 19 of the Reporter’s Record at page 149)

Q.  Is that because you pulled a plug out of the phone or –
A.  No, it just stopped ringing. 
(Volume 19 of the Reporter’s Record at page 150)

Lyn Mclellan said nothing.  At no time did he mention phone records.   The phone was ringing at 11:19 p.m., 11:25 p.m., 11:46 p.m., 11:48 p.m., 12:14 a.m. 12:19 a.m., 1:54 a.m., 2:37 a.m., 3:12 a.m., and 3:43 a.m.  That doesn’t include a known outgoing call for a Yellow Cab at 3:59 a.m.

The ‘driver’ related to the drug deal was also one of the prosecution’s witnesses.  He, also, testified he was sleeping that night.  According to Samuel Johnson, he went straight home after the shooting at 12:00 midnight:

      Q.  You go directly home?
      A.  Yeah.
      Q.  You tell your wife what happened?
      A.  No, she was asleep at the time.
      Q.  Pretty exciting events in your life, isn’t it?
      A.  Very exciting.
      Q.  You just get in bed and go to sleep?
      A.  No, I took a shower.
      Q.  Took a shower, and then got in bed and went to sleep?
      A.  No, opened me a can of soda and went to bed.
      Q.  Talk to anybody that night?
      A.  No.
      Q.  Talk to Robin or Howard Scott at any point after that?
      A.  No. 
      (Volume 19 of the Reporter’s Record at page 149)

Once again, the prosecution did not stop the trial or in any way indicate their witness was being deceptive.

“It is unprofessional and dishonorable to deal other than candidly with the facts in taking the statements of witnesses, in drawing affidavits and other documents, and in the presentation of causes.” –Canons of Professional Ethics of the American Bar Association

“No person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,” – Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Charles Mamou is out of appeals and awaiting a date for his execution after spending over two decades of his life on Death Row in Texas.

All posts and details of this case, including phone records that were not shared with the defense, a letter from the ‘key witness’ stating he didn’t know anything, and how Mamou was even accused of an unsolved murder during his trial can be found here.  Anyone with information regarding this case can contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net. There is also a facebook page dedicated to sharing the truth.

TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU:
Charles Mamou #999333
Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53
3872 South FM 350
Livingston, TX 77351
Mamou can also be contacted through JPay via email, but please include your mailing address if you contact him this way, as he can only respond through the mail.

“Please keep fighting for my son.”  That was a text received from Charles Mamou’s mother.   Her son was sentenced to death over twenty years ago in Houston, while the Harris County District Attorney’s Office was under the rule of Johnny Holmes, a man known for and proud of pursuing the death penalty. 

The amount of information manipulated or not shared with the jury in the Mamou case is disturbing, but one aspect that gets overlooked, is the theatrics and misinformation put into destroying Mamou’s character for the jury.  What they lacked in evidence, was made up for in portraying the defendant as a monster.  And then they instructed the jury they could consider things they would ‘hear about his character’ when deciding the case.  – Volume 24 of the Reporters’ Record at page 6.  

But what did the D.A. really know about Charles Mamou?

Mamou got into the business of dealing drugs early on in his life.  He wasn’t born into the ‘haves’ and knew his fair share of struggle.  He struggled with school.  He struggled with his health.  He absolutely could have chosen a different path, but he saw an opportunity dealing drugs and the well-travelled avenue to taking care of the people he cared most about – not to mention keeping the hot water on.  Hot water wasn’t something he always had growing up. 

Over time, Mamou earned a reputation, but it wasn’t one for violence.  As one resident of Sunset described him,

“Chucky was a respectable boy and a fine young man.  I worked as a cook at Sunset Elementary School where Chucky attended. He was a quiet little boy and mainly kept to himself.  To my knowledge, he did not have any behavior problems in school and his grades were either average or above average.

“When Chucky was older, he would often talk to my son about his problems.  My son was on drugs and Chucky would advise him to do better things with his life.  I wanted my son to be more like Chucky.

“There were times when I went shopping and Chucky was in the grocery store.   He would buy my groceries and never wanted any money back. There were many other people in town that Chucky would help buy groceries, pay rent or their electric bill.  Chucky helped people.”

Don’t get me wrong.   There was nothing glamorous about what Charles Mamou did for a living.  He wasn’t a violent man though.   Regardless of how the prosecution described him for the jury, the people who knew him day in and day out had a more accurate perspective.

Another man that knew Charles Mamou, Jr., stating they met in the ‘streets’ and clubs, also described his friend.

“Chucky does not have a ‘rough bone’ in his body.  I have witnessed him paying bills for friend, family members and other people in the community.  Charles, Jr., is a friend that everyone wishes to have once in their life.”

“If it was the dope that put Charles, Jr., behind bars, I pray that everyone in the world would burn the dope, and start praying.”

It was the ‘dope’ that put Mamou behind bars. 

In 1998 three men knowingly brought a girl to a dark alley in Houston, with a plan.  According to everyone involved, including the testimony of the two surviving men – they were there for one reason and one reason only.   They were there to rob Charles Mamou at gunpoint.  That’s it.

That was the plan, but it didn’t work out the way it was supposed to.  Mamou started shooting when confronted with a gun pointed in his direction.  His driver drove off and left him behind.  He jumped in the car that belonged to the men who were attempting to rob him and drove back to the apartment complex on Fondren, in Houston, where he was staying and where the other individuals who helped organize the drug deal were located.   All of the existing evidence supports that, including things Mamou said he observed when he got back to the apartments, which observations have been confirmed by statements the jury never heard, as well as evidence that existed.

The greatest injustice in this story – was the lack of effort to find out what really happened to the victim after she got to the apartment complex that night.  There was no effort made to pursue possible answers, including tracking a cell phone call that one of the involved parties made that night –  from who knows where.  That individual said he was in bed sleeping – but the police knew his cell phone made a phone call at 2:37 a.m. on the night in question.   One would think tracking a cell phone call from a suspect and the driver in the drug deal would be standard, especially in light of the fact that individual claimed to have been sleeping and not making or receiving phone calls at the time.  He lied. His cell phone made a call from somewhere at 2:37 a.m.  The police documented that information the week of the murder, although they never pursued it, and faxed the phone records to the District Attorney after the court proceedings began.

Charles Mamou only just became aware those phone records existed and were in the hands of the Houston Police Department and the District Attorney twenty years ago. 

The prosecution didn’t pursue the information they had that might uncover what happened to the victim, but were more focused on convincing the jury that Charles Mamou was a monster.

And so, even though the medical examiner, Roger Milton, never mentioned a rape kit that was collected in his Autopsy Report, and even though the District Attorney requested the rape kit be processed and received the results of the rape kit prior to the trial – that information was also never shared with Charles Mamou. Mamou never knew a rape kit was gathered until last year.

Rather than share that information with the jury, Lyn McClellan, an Assistant District Attorney for Harris County did something else.  He and his team chose to tell the jury that Charles Mamou sexually assaulted the victim.  The entire time he was doing that, he knew full well a rape kit had been collected – and it revealed no semen found on any items. 

“And he takes her to Lynchester.    He marches her to the back, and he makes her commit oral sodomy, makes her suck his penis. Imagine that, ladies and gentleman.” – Volume 24 of the Reporter’s Record at page 38.  That same attorney went on to describe Mamou’s character, “He’s vicious.”  “He’s ruthless.”  “He’s cold-blooded.”  “He devastated and destroyed.”

The prosecution had no evidence that Charles Mamou did anything to Mary Carmouche.  They had phone records Mamou didn’t know about. They had a rape kit Mamou didn’t know about.  And something else they’ve had all these years – ‘trace evidence’, ‘hairs’ that were collected during the collection of the rape it.  That evidence sat in the HPD Property Room for twenty years, and Charles Mamou nor the jury were ever informed they existed. 

Of note, in 2019, two envelopes containing ‘biological evidence’ in this case were signed out of the Property Room, but it is unknown for what purpose or who authorized the removal, as HPD will not respond, other than to tell me the D.A. is the only one who can authorize removal of evidence.  At the D.A.’s office I was told they didn’t know anything about the removal of the evidence. 

Years ago, Chris Mamou described his brother in a statement.

“Growing up, I can always remember my brother being there and looking out for me.”

“…he taught me how to walk with my head up high.”

“…he took me to the basketball court and tried to teach me how to play.”

“Charles, Jr., encouraged me to excel in school by rewarding me with praises and benefits, such as paying for my way to the neighbor dance if I had a good report.”

“…nothing would compare to the feeling of just making him proud which also encouraged me to do well.”

“All I knew was he had his own money and he shared with everyone – family, friends, or a stranger who needed help.  I saw this and wanted to do the same thing.  I approached him about making my own money and was denied, remembering his reasoning was that this was not for everybody.  He did not want me to get involved.”    

Charles Mamou has spent over twenty years on death row and awaits his execution for a drug deal gone wrong– not a murder.   Investigators didn’t pursue what happened to Mary Carmouche after she arrived at that apartment complex.  They were focused on ‘making’ Charles Mamou guilty – but none of the pieces fit.  No matter which way you turn the puzzle, they won’t fit.  Sticking to the ‘story’ isn’t going to make it any more true than it was twenty years ago.  Mamou can be executed – it’s not going to make it true.  He can die incarcerated during a pandemic – it still won’t make it true. 

“He’s my firstborn.  He has my name.”  Charles Mamou, Sr., will never give up on his son.  He recently told me, “If they want to kill an innocent man – take me.  Don’t take him – take me.”

All posts and details of this case, including phone records that were not shared with the defense, a letter from the ‘key witness’ stating he didn’t know anything, and how Mamou was even accused of an unsolved murder during his trial can be found here.  Anyone with information regarding this case can contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net. There is also a facebook page dedicated to sharing the truth.

TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU:
Charles Mamou #999333
Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53
3872 South FM 350
Livingston, TX 77351

April 17, 2019, ‘Items were signed for by Mary K. Childs-Henry – Item 001 Sealed envelope said to contain biological evidence.’

Then again, June 24, 2019, ‘Items were signed for by Mary K. Childs-Henry – Item 004 Sealed envelope said to contain biological evidence.’

The Mamou trial is riddled with information not shared with Charles Mamou or the jury – and in 2019 two notes were made in the case file noting – ‘Biological evidence’ signed for. Those two notes became two more things Harris County didn’t share with Charles Mamou.

*     *     *     *     *

In 1998, Charles Mamou was accused of fleeing a drug deal gone wrong and killing Mary Carmouche. He was then convicted and sentenced to death by a jury who wasn’t told all there was to know.

The victim was last seen late on a Sunday, early on Monday morning.  On a Wednesday, Terrence Dodson, the prosecution’s key witness, stated Mamou confessed to him, making a video statement.  In it, he claimed Mamou called him from Louisiana in the early morning hours of Tuesday – the day before.  He also stated Mamou told him to pick him up from the bus station in Houston that same night, Tuesday night. 

During that interview, investigators were aware Mamou was not in Louisiana on Tuesday morning nor on Tuesday mid-day, but actually in Houston.  Mamou didn’t get on a bus from Houston, going to Louisiana, until 1:30 in the afternoon on that Tuesday.  As a matter of fact, at the very time Dodson was making his statement in one room at HPD, another witness was making a statement as well. That witness actually drove Mamou to the bus station leaving Houston on Tuesday afternoon – not heading back to Houston as Dodson was telling police but away.  The written statement of the other witness – is notarized by the same investigator that took Dodson’s video statement.   Detective Novak had decades of experience at HPD.

The jury heard Dodson’s testimony and were never told the conflict. They also heard a different version of how the ‘confession’ took place than the recorded one.  At trial, the confession was described as taking place over days, partially on the phone and partially in person.  The jury never heard Dodson’s inconsistent details.

The jury was also never shown a letter Dodson wrote Mamou months later stating he was glad Mamou didn’t tell him shit. 

*     *     *     *     *

Mamou always maintained he drove back to an apartment complex on Fondren after the drug deal gone wrong – that was the last place he saw Mary Carmouche.  He’s described the people he saw and some details about the parking lot that night.  In contrast, the prosecution argued Mamou fled the drug deal, sexually assaulted and killed Carmouche behind a home on Lynchester Avenue. 

Mamou described seeing Shawn Eaglin leaving Howard Scott’s apartment and getting into a Yellow Cab that night.   An employee for Yellow Cab testified that – yes, the company had a call from a ‘Shawn’ and a cab was requested for the address of Howard Scott who lived at the complex.  The prosecution, in turn, pointed out that anybody could call a cab and use any name and any address – it doesn’t prove it was actually a legitimate call or that anyone was picked up. 

It was not pointed out for the jury that the caller I.D. from the cab company listed Howard Scott’s home phone number.  Mamou didn’t know until 2019 that the calling number listed on the Yellow Cab printout supported what he had always said.

The jury also did not hear Shawn Eaglin lived approximately five minutes from the apartment complex.   That is the amount of time the cab log indicated the customer’s drive was. 

*     *     *     *     *

According to Detective Novak’s testimony, Shawn Eaglin was an individual they were looking at as a potential suspect.   Eaglin’s  name is handwritten throughout the case file.  According to everyone’s testimony, Eaglin knew most of the individuals involved, as well as introduced most of them.  A written statement by Robin Scott refers to police going to Shawn Eaglin’s home during their investigation.    

There are no records of any interviews of Shawn Eaglin in HPD’s file. 

*     *     *     *     *

Howard Scott was transported to HPD along with his wife, although driven separately, on Tuesday, December 8, 1998.  He was transported from his home to be interviewed because what he was telling police was inconsistent with what they were hearing from his wife. 

Detective Novak, in his testimony, referred to taking a written statement from Scott the day they initially went to his home and transported him to the police department.    

Referred to several times, the original statement given by Howard Scott on Tuesday, December 8, 1998, is not in the records. 

In 2019, Scott told an investigator he saw Charles Mamou at the apartment complex parking lot that night.  He also said he saw Mary Carmouche there.

*     *     *     *     *

Howard Scott testified he went to bed that  night – getting ‘no more phone calls’.  When specifically asked if that was because his phone was unplugged, “No, it just stopped ringing.” 

His phone didn’t stop ringing and HPD was aware of that.  An investigator in Scott’s apartment wrote down all the calls from his caller I.D., jotting names by some of the numbers.  Phone calls were coming in to Howard Scott’s apartment through 3:43 A.M. that Sunday night.   In HPD’s file there is a fax cover sheet, dated September 24, 1999, indicating they faxed the phone records to Lynn McClellan, the prosecutor, during jury selection.

Mamou never knew about the phone records HPD and apparently the prosecutor were aware of until 2019. The jury was never told Howard Scott’s testimony was not accurate and his phone was ringing into the early morning hours.  Scott’s credibility was never questioned.

*     *     *     *     *

The phone records also indicated Shawn Eaglin, the man Mamou said took a cab from Scott’s apartment and the name the Yellow Cab company said called for a cab from Scott’s address at 3:59 A.M. – also called Howard Scott that night as late as 3:12 A.M. 

There were several phone calls from various people in the early morning hours to Scott’s apartment that night.  The jury was never made aware of any of them.   Charles Mamou was also unaware they existed. 

*     *     *     *     *

“And he takes her to Lynchester.  He marches her to the back, and he makes her commit oral sodomy, makes her suck his penis.  Imagine that, ladies and gentleman.”  The prosecution asked the jury to imagine that, all the while having results of a rape kit that included oral swabs.  The kit indicated no semen was detected.  Mamou never knew a kit existed until 2019.   The District Attorney had requested the kit be processed months before the trial and had already received the results. Mamou was never charged with sexual assault but the jury was told he assaulted the victim.

The kit also revealed the existence of ‘trace collection items’ and ‘hairs’. 

The prosecution nor the defense mentioned this to the jury.  Mamou was unaware any of it existed until last year. 

*     *     *     *     *

Robin Scott gave a written statement to police on Tuesday, December 8, 1998, when she and her husband were transported to HPD for statements, as well as Wednesday, December 9, when police brought them both in again, although Howard Scott’s original statement is not in the police file.  In one of Ms. Scott’s statements she told police Charles Mamou had arrived at her apartment at approximately 12:45 on the night of the incident.  That time frame would have made it impossible for Mamou to have accomplished what he was accused of, as well as supported his version of events in which he drove directly back to the apartment complex after the drug deal gone wrong.

The jury never knew about the interview.   Charles Mamou did not see this statement until 2019.

*     *     *     *     *

Samuel Johnson was a participant in the drug deal gone wrong, and Mamou described meeting him at the apartment complex after the original shooting.  In contrast, Johnson testified he drove away from the drug deal, straight to his home and to bed, never speaking to anyone. 

Phone records contradict that, indicating Samuel Johnson’s cell phone called Howard Scott’s apartment at 2:37 A.M.  The previously mentioned phone records included that information.  Samuel Johnson also had a landline at his apartment – but the phone call he made was from a cell phone.  Twenty years ago, people would often use their landline if they were in their home, but if police investigated the location the ‘cell phone’ call was made from, that information is not in the case file.  Mamou never had a chance to investigate where the call was made from, because he was unaware of the phone records HPD had.

At trial and without the phone records, Mamou did not have the opportunity to question Johnson’s credibility after he said he went straight to bed and spoke to no one. 

Two witnesses have since told an investigator they saw Samuel Johnson in the complex parking lot that night, having driven in just prior to Mamou – which is consistent with what Mamou has always maintained. 

*     *     *     *     *

Charles Mamou described a man on a bike in the complex parking lot when he arrived with Mary Carmouche.  The prosecution dismissed the claims.

It turns out an individual has since told an investigator he was in the parking lot that night – on a bike – and he saw Mamou drive into the parking lot after Samuel Johnson.

Also supporting Mamou’s account, the phone records indicate a unique phone number called Howard Scott’s apartment on the evening of the incident, at 11:48 P.M. and 1:54 A.M.  There is a handwritten note in the HPD investigators phone records, indicating a name next to the number.  That name – happens to be an acquaintance of the ‘man on the bike’.

The jury never heard any of that.

*     *     *     *     *

The prosecution told the jury, “He  tried to murder all four of those people out there, but that was beyond his control.”  “That was his plan.  It was all premeditated.”  “He’s vicious.  He’s ruthless.  He’s cold-blooded.”

The individual who died at the scene of the drug deal had a loaded gun in his hand.  Both surviving parties to the drug deal described their plan to rob Mamou at gunpoint.

*     *     *     *     *

The jury was shown autopsy photos and heard victim impact statements concerning a victim of an unsolved murder that took place several months earlier.  Mamou has never been charged with that crime, but HPD currently has him listed as ‘Arrested, Charged’. 

A man named Joseph Melancon claimed Mamou shot and killed the man, Anthony Williams.  The Williams case file includes a witness statement describing Joseph Melancon being dressed up and with Anthony Williams that night.  The witness describes the two men leaving the club together.   According to the witness, a short time after leaving with Melancon, a man ran in the club saying the victim had been shot.    

That witness indicated they thought Joseph Melancon was involved in the murder, but the case was never pursued after Joseph Melancon testified Charles Mamou committed the crime.  Melancon’s testimony did not match his original statement to police, but Mamou was never given an opportunity to defend himself of this crime, as he was never charged with the crime. 

*     *     *     *     *

That’s what took place in Harris County two decades ago.  So, in 2019 when it became known biological evidence was signed for, it was reasonable to want to know why. I flew to Houston.

At the HPD Records Department, I was told they didn’t know the answer, and I should contact the Property Room, the District Attorney’s office, and the Medical Examiner. 

At the District Attorney’s office, I was told the case was currently ‘closed’.  There would be no current requests for evidence from them because no one was working it, and the files themselves were in storage – the case was inactive. 

At the HPD Property Room, which was where the biological evidence was signed out from – I was told there is protocol in place, and in order to find out why the biological evidence was signed out, I would need to go to Homicide and speak with the investigator on the case.

At Homicide, I was told it was a ‘cold case’ and there was no active investigator on the case, I would need to talk to the person in charge of cold cases.

The cold case investigator wasn’t in and never returned my phone call.

After I returned home, I was called by someone I had never spoken to, D. Wilker, from Homicide.  I was told ‘only the Property Division could answer my questions’.  Of note – the Property Division is where I had originally gone and was told that due to ‘protocol’, I would need to go to Homicide.

During that phone conversation, I was also told Ms. Wilker would reach out to the Property Division to see if she could get an answer for me, but she couldn’t make any promises.  In addition, she informed me ‘we are mandated to test every piece of evidence’, suggesting that the evidence was taken out for testing.   Ms. Wilker also suggested an investigator could have requested the material be checked out, but as I had already been told – there was no investigator on the case at that time.  I was told she would get back in touch with me after she reached out to the Property Division.

After a couple weeks and no contact from Ms. Wilker – I called her.  Ms. Wilker was dismissive during this conversation, telling me the rape kit results I was looking for at that time were ‘irrelevant’.   I was told the defense had every piece of evidence they needed to know.  The ‘window of opportunity’ for finding out anything was closed.  And, finally, yes, the evidence had been checked out in 2019 and had been in the possession of Mary K. Childs-Henry, but it was now back where it belonged.  It had been checked out for ‘cataloging purposes’. 

I then asked Ms. Wilker if she considered the matter closed, and she told me she did.

After that phone call I wrote a letter to Internal Affairs and the Chief of Police, as ‘cataloging’ two pieces of twenty year old biological evidence didn’t seem logical, in light of the circles I had been lead in to come to that conclusion.  

The Houston Police Department responded, telling me no one had done anything wrong. “In your letter, you inquired about procedures for removing evidence regarding Mr. Mamou’s case. The District Attorney is the only person that can authorize any type of evidence to be released for any reason.  There are procedures in place for care, custody and control of evidence that is stored in the Property Room. You may reach the Harris County District Attorney’s Office at ….”

As of this date, it remains unclear why the biological evidence was signed for in 2019. 

The employee who signed for the evidence, Mary K. Childs-Henry, also worked for the HPD lab in 1998, when the crime occurred.   In the early 2000’s the Houston Chronicle ran several articles focused on HPDs troubled lab, to include mishandling of evidence.  Ms. Childs-Henry was mentioned in some of those articles. 

“Analyst Mary Childs-Henry never took statistics or genetics, and her failure to do a timely analysis of a DNA sample in 1996 was part of a chain of lab errors that allowed an innocent man to be held in jail for nine months, according to depositions and an internal memo. Two lawsuits were filed over that incident, which prompted the city to audit the lab.” –
Houston Chronicle, ‘Report: File review shows Houston police DNA analysts lack education, training’ – September 6, 2003

“”This just goes to show that the bench workers were doing nothing more than following orders and that the problems in that lab were created by the poor management within the lab and above,” said Fred Keys, Childs-Henry’s lawyer.” –
Houston Chronicle, ‘Panel Tosses Out Crime Analyst’s Lab Suspension’, By Todd Ackerman – February 28, 2004

“So far, two men have been released from prison after the discovery of flawed crime lab work in their cases. In a written statement, Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt announced that three lab analysts criticized in the report have been relieved of duty pending the outcome of an internal investigation. Those three employees are Mary Childs-Henry, Joseph H. Chu, and Raynard Cockrell.” –
Houston Chronicle, ‘More Problems Found At HPD Crime Lab’, By Steve McVicker and Roma Khanna – January 4, 2006

“Houston Police Department supervisors suspended Mary Childs-Henry, Joseph Chu and Raynard Cockrell after an independent team of experts found they had failed to report evidence that could have helped defendants and that they made errors in DNA and serology tests.” –
Houston Chronicle, ‘Crime-lab Analysts Had Avoided Serious Penalties’, By Roma Khanna – January 8, 2006

“The three – Mary Childs-Henry, Joseph Chu and Raynard Cockrell – were suspended recently after Bromwich’s team found they had failed to report evidence that could have helped defendants and that they made errors in DNA and serology tests.”
Houston Chronicle, ‘Crime Labe Investigator Wants Subpoena Power’, By Steve McVicker – January 10, 2006

“Three analysts suspended because of the latest findings by the Bromwich team — Mary Childs-Henry, Joseph Chu and Raynard Cockrell — have been targeted for discipline in the past but have escaped serious punishment.”
Houston Chronicle, ‘Crime Lab Investigator To Target Specific Cases’,
By Steve McVicker – January 11, 2006

Among the Courtroom exhibits are photos of the Lexus involved in the drug deal with someone in the background who bears a striking resemblance to Mary K. Childs-Henry. Having worked in the lab in 1998, it is possible she also worked on Mamou’s case twenty years ago.

The climate at that time in history, in that place, wasn’t a secret.  What remains to be seen is, will the Harris County of today execute Charles Mamou based on a 1999 decision jurors made without all the information available, at a time when the end game wasn’t always justice, but the conviction. 

Anyone with information regarding this case can contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net.  Anything you share with me will be confidential.

All related posts detailing all I have learned over the last two years are available at Charles Mamou.

TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU:
Charles Mamou #999333
Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53
3872 South FM 350
Livingston, TX 77351