Things were different in Harris County, Texas, two decades ago. It could be said there was a thirst for blood that is less pronounced now. Charles Mamou will most likely get an execution date in the near future for a case that was prosecuted when securing a death penalty was a badge of honor, celebrated even. It was more acceptable in the halls of justice at that time to jam the pieces of the puzzle into place if investigators or a prosecutor ‘wanted’ a particular someone for a crime – or throw the pieces out if need be. Hopefully, things are different now. Mamou will pay with his life for the climate of the late 90’s, but it’s not too late to share what the prosecution knew when they tried the case. And what they know today for that matter. There was little interest in finding out what happened back when they could have, and a lot of interest in making a guilty verdict stick – which took some doing with no evidence.
Charles Mamou first wrote for this site in March, 2018. Out of curiosity, I looked up some articles about him after the first few pieces he submitted. Two things stood out – allegations of sexual assault, some articles saying he was charged with that crime, and a pair of his sunglasses that were reported to have been left near the body. It had to be true if he left his sunglasses, right? I envisioned the location to be an abandoned house on a block of old abandoned houses. It wasn’t until I started reading Mamou’s case file I learned the sunglasses were miles from the body that was found in a residential neighborhood – and the sexual assault? There is a lot more to that story as well.
Charles Mamou, Jr., was born and raised in Sunset, Louisiana, and early on he began taking care of his family and broke the law to do it. Like many before him and since, some of his most successful role models were drug dealers. And so began his life of crime. He wasn’t a choir boy, but he had a reputation for helping people out.
Houston, Texas, wasn’t Mamou’s stomping ground. He didn’t know the area like the back of his hand, but his dad lived there, as well as a couple cousins. He would travel to the area for ‘business’, if you can call it that. That is why he was there in December, 1998. He was involved in a transaction that included several other individuals, all of whom were residents of Houston. He wasn’t even driving his own car on that trip. He was staying with a couple in their apartment and was being driven by others tied to the same anticipated business transaction.
The evening of December 6, 1998, was mild and dry. Lantern Point Drive, where the ‘drug deal’ and attempted robbery eventually took place, had no lights, and according to police, it was a cloudy night. Samuel Johnson was driving the car Mamou was in. Terrence Dodson had been a participant in the transaction earlier in the day, but had since gone home. The car they met on the dark street where it all took place carried four passengers, including Mary Carmouche.
All surviving parties later admitted to their involvement in a drug deal gone wrong, although no one was ever charged with anything involved in that incident other than Charles Mamou, who was charged with kidnapping when he fled the scene after gunfire erupted and his partner drove away without him. The deceased individual had a loaded gun next to his body, leaving a good argument for self-defense. Mary Carmouche was driven to the location by three men who were there to rob Mamou, and she was in the back seat of the car he sped away in.
When security guards arrived shortly after the shooting,
which took place around midnight, one man was dead and two were injured. Both vehicles were gone.
The two surviving men both testified in court that the vehicle
Samuel Johnson was driving drove off first – leaving Charles Mamou behind. Mamou then jumped into the blue Lexus and
fled the scene.
According to the testimony of Kevin Walter, (Volume 16, of the
Reporter’s Record at page 137):
Q.
All right. Then where was the blue Lexus at the point you picked up the
gun?
A.
Taking off.
Q.
Where was the red car?
A.
Done took off.
Q.
It had taken off before the blue car?
A.
Yes.
Kevin Walter had no reason to lie
about which car took off first, and according to his testimony, Samuel Johnson
drove away first in the red car – leaving Charles Mamou, who then jumped in the
blue Lexus and drove away.
Dion Holley was the other
individual who was shot at the scene. His
testimony (Volume 18, of the Reporter’s Record at page 115) was as follows:
Q. All right. And what did you see?
A. I saw the red car backing up and turned
around in the street, and I saw the blue car leaving off.
Q. When you say you saw the red car backing up
and turning around, how did they make – if they’re going backwards, how did
they turn around and go the other way?
Is it like a three point turn where they stop, back up, and pull around;
or is it like a scene on shows where they’re able to hit the brakes and the car
spins around?
A. That’s pretty much how it was.
Q. So, it was a very quick thing?
A. Yes.
Q. Did it appear to you that the red car was
trying to get out of there really quick?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And then that vehicle was followed by your
mom’s Lexus?
A. That’s
correct.
Samuel Johnson, the driver of the red car and Mamou’s associate in the deal, later became a suspect in this case. Although his version of events contradicted all of the witnesses’ testimony, the prosecution went with his description of what took place. According to Samuel Johnson’s statement to police, he was not concerned about Charles Mamou or the car that could have held the drugs he was there to buy that night. He was not concerned about the shooting he had been involved in or the girl whose whereabouts he supposedly knew nothing about. The following is Johnson’s testimony regarding what happened next (Volume 19, of the Reporter’s Record at page 115):
Q.
You go directly home?
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Tell your wife what happened?
A.
No, she was asleep at the time
Q.
Pretty exciting events in our 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
The next morning Samuel Johnson got up in his usual fashion
and headed to work – where he was employed as an Orkin man, treating homes in the
Houston area.
Charles Mamou has always maintained that he followed Samuel Johnson back to the apartments, with Mary Carmouche in the car. According to Mamou there were other individuals present in the parking lot of the apartments when they arrived, along with himself, the victim and Johnson. Twenty years later, there are witnesses that support that.
Until his execution, I will be sharing everything I have learned over the last eighteen months. All of the information will be on a facebook page, Charles Mamou – How Wrongful Convictions Are Made, where I hope to share what the prosecution knew and what the defense failed to share. There will also be a catagory on this site, ‘Charles Mamou’, where every blog post will be kept.
Anyone with information regarding what took place in
December of 1998, please contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net.
“With time moving so fast and this date looming, I wanted to
make sure to let you know…”
That was part of a letter I got this weekend – a goodbye letter. Travis Runnels is a very private person and would be very disappointed in me if he knew I shared even that. He probably won’t find out though, and if it gets one person to call the governor on his behalf or sign his petition – I’ll take the chance.
I tried to imagine what he must feel like, living alone in a box and knowing he will likely be killed before Christmas. I panicked and became overwhelmed by a feeling of claustrophobia. I had to shake it off and clear my head. What I can’t possibly imagine is having to live in that knowledge as the minutes count down. Why would we do that to anybody? Whatever twisted emotion takes a hold of someone who intentionally takes a life – is no less twisted because an intentional murder takes place in a sterile environment by trained staff. It’s no less of a killing. If anything it’s even sicker. It’s not brought on by a storm of emotion. It’s planned, well thought out, costly – and includes an audience.
Travis Runnels killed someone and those that thrive on
vengeance will rev their engines and cheer at his passing, feeling justified. I know because I’ve gotten the hate mail. I can’t help those people.
For the rest of us – please call the Governor of Texas at 512-463-2000 and ask for mercy and this execution not to take place. Please make your feelings known. We have to be just as tireless as those that have the energy for vengeance – and in doing so, we will overcome.
There is also a Petition that was started by a very close friend of Travis’, hoping to commute the death sentence to a life sentence. Please sign it.
Words from Death Row…
“’You know, in my day your kind would’ve never gotten so much generous attention. We simply would’ve brought you out yonder, found a good ole tree to hang ya from. Just one less…’ he was saying just before he cut himself off.” – Charles ‘Chucky’ Mamou, Death Row – out of appeals
“It’s baffling that people can actually believe justice is being served by watching a man being strapped to a table and having an IV inserted into his arm to be filled with poison until it kills him. Justice…” – Travis Runnels, Death Row – scheduled to be executed December 11, 2019
I just heard on the radio they put him to death, And his last words were, “I can finally rest.” I feel ya bro, no more pain and misery, Rest in peace my friend, you’re finally free. – Troy Clark, executed by Texas, September 26, 1998
I’d been labeled a murderer by all those that mattered. There’d be no more tedious claims of innocence for doubters to discredit. There’d be no salvation for people like me as long as there are people like them. And there’d be no hope of a better tomorrow when my tomorrow was upon me today. – Chanton, Death Row
I seen Lil Jack get in that van. I seen Big Buck get in that van. I seen Thread get in that van. I seen Smoke get in that van. I seen Chester get in that van. I seen Ross get in that van. I seen Tick get in that van. I seen Savage get in that van. I seen Bones get in that van. I seen Diaz get in that van. They won’t get me, ‘cause I have a plan. I don’t want to kill myself, I don’t want to kill myself. – Pete Russell, Death Row
There is no valid argument for the premeditated taking of a life.
Terry Robinson has quietly maintained his innocence for two decades, and many would prefer it remain that way – quiet. It’s easier. For Robinson to be innocent, someone has to be guilty. When a death sentence weighs heavily on the word of family or close friends – there is typically silence. I’ve heard it described as ‘the dark time’ by different families from different parts of the country. Time marches on, no one talks, families break apart. To defend the one accused – is to imply the accuser did the unthinkable.
This is some of what happened twenty years ago.
A man was killed in 1999, and a family lost him forever at
the hands of someone. Mary Hoskins, Terry Robinson’s mother, also
lost her son. And so began the dark time,
and I imagine she wasn’t able to grieve openly, the way a mother should. No one
talks. No one compares statements. No
one reads the testimony. As the saying
goes – let sleeping dogs lie. Sometimes
the truth gets buried in the silence.
Mary Hoskins could have concocted an alibi for her son when
she was interviewed by police, but she didn’t.
Out of all the interviews and statements, hers had to be the most
difficult and because of that, probably the most accurate. She knew what she said could impact her son –
for better or worse. As hard as it was,
she didn’t give Robinson an ‘out’ for the time of the crime – she told what she
knew. That very fact, speaks to her
integrity. And when she became aware
police were looking for her son – she tried her best to give them information
on where they might find him. She didn’t
want him hurt in the search. Following
is the interview of Mary Hoskins:
Mrs. Hoskins stated
that she is the mother of Terry Robinson, and that back on the Sunday that this
incident happened, she stated that she had got off of work around 3:30 PM. She stated that she works at the N.C. Special
Care Center, and that when she got home, that Terry and his girlfriend,
Shahara, were there. She stated that
she’s not sure of what time they left, but that it was still light
outside. She stated that Montreal
Bullock who lives next door to them came over, and she thinks that Terry and Shahara
left with him. Mrs. Hoskins stated that
she didn’t see Terry again until the next night. She stated that Shahara told
her that they went to her mother’s house, and her mother brought them back out
to her house and they stayed in the barn that Sunday night.
The defense didn’t call any witnesses, so although Mary
Hoskin’s interview could have called into question the credibility of Ronald
Bullock and Jesse Hill – Mary wasn’t given that opportunity. No defense was presented.
Sophia Hoskins, Robinson’s sister, was also interviewed by police. She didn’t give her brother an alibi or say what she thought might help defend him. She gave a brief, credible interview.
Sophia stated that
Terry is her brother, and that on Sunday afternoon that Terry and Shahara were
at the house. She stated that she left to go to work at Harris Teeter around
4:30 P.M. and that she got off work that night around 9:30 P.M. She stated that when she got home, that she
went to the bathroom, and then to her bedroom. She stated that she didn’t see
Terry or Shahara after she got back from work.
Again, the defense chose not to call Sophia Hoskins to the
stand, although her interview contradicts the trial testimony of Ronald Bullock
and Jesse Hill, who both told police that Robinson was with Ronald Bullock organizing
a robbery on Sunday afternoon and not with his girlfriend. Jesse Hill was interviewed by police and said
that Ronald Bullock and Terry Robinson were at his house at 3:00 discussing the
plans and asking him to participate.
The jury never heard anything regarding the interviews of
Mary Hoskins or Sophia Hoskins, nor did the defense call them to testify. Nor was the jury given the opportunity to hear
from the girlfriend who was said to have spent time with Robinson for a good
part of that day – although it appears investigators didn’t even interview her,
as I see nothing regarding that in the case file.
Instead they heard from Jesse Hill, Terry Robinson’s cousin,
whose interview with police contradicted both Mary and Sophia.
Mr. Hill stated that
yesterday around 3:00 P.M. while he was on Kincaid Avenue, his two cousins,
Terry Robinson and Montreal Bullock came over in a gray four door car. He stated that they told him that they needed
some money, and that they were going to rob the Pizza Inn. Mr. Hill stated that he told them they were
crazy. Mr. Hill stated that they then
took him over to his mother’s house on Stantonsbury Road and dropped him
off. He stated that later that night he
asked his sister to take him back over on Kincaid Avenue.
The above interview goes on and contradicts Mr. Hill’s own
trial testimony on some points, as well as contradicting Mr. Bullock’s trial
testimony, the other individual who testified Terry Robinson committed murder. While stating that Terry Robinson was
planning a robbery, in contrast to the information Robinson’s mother and sister
had both given to the police – Jesse Hill also gave himself a solid alibi for
the evening, stating he was at his mother’s house.
If the police questioned Mr. Hill’s mother, I have not been
able to find those records.
Without a defense, the prosecution didn’t have to deal with any of the contradictions. But the reality is, Terry Robinson couldn’t have been planning a robbery with Bullock and Hill at 3:00 that afternoon if he was at his mother’s home with his girlfriend. The jury didn’t get the opportunity to decide who they believed because they were never presented any of that information.
Terry Robinson was sentenced to death two decades ago and
has spent every day since then on death row.
If anybody has any information regarding the whereabouts of Terry Robinson
or his accusers on any part of Sunday, May 16, 1999, please contact me. kimberleycarter@verizon.net
Whether you support the death penalty or not, most can agree the ultimate punishment should require impeccable integrity and absolute proof. Everyone from the detectives, to the defense attorneys, to the prosecutors, to the jury, to the judge and even the witnesses, who are sometimes involved in the crime – all need to have unquestionable integrity and lack all prejudice. That’s the only way it could work.
That level of blanket integrity and lack of prejudice doesn’t exist. We don’t have the ability to judge the moral character and integrity levels of all the individuals involved. Knowing that, incorporating a death penalty in our system results in innocent people living on death row and some being executed.
Terry Robinson has been on death row for twenty years and
has always maintained his innocence.
This post will begin a new catagory on this site and will be dedicated to taking a closer look at why Terry Robinson was sentenced to death. Comments and private messages are welcome and highly encouraged. Unfortunately, once someone hears a person is sentenced to death – they assume something happened in court to prove that, and the public never hears what actually took place in the courtroom. In Mr. Robinson’s situation the prosecution presented a case, and the defense rested.
In this country, we are innocent until ‘proven’ guilty. Terry Robinson has always maintained his innocence, inluding having no knowledge of what happened at the Pizza Inn on May 16, 1999, in Wilson, NC.
Following is the voluntary statement of Ronald Bullock, the
man who said Terry Robinson committed murder, given at 1:35 a.m. on May 18,
1999:
Mr. Bullock states
that he and Duck walked to the Pizza Inn last night. Mr. Bullock states that he had a .380 automatic,
chrome in color. Mr. Bullock states that
they went there to rob the place. Mr. Bullock states that they ran in the place
and he stopped at the drive-thru cash register.
Mr. Bullock states that Duck ran out of his sight. He heard one shot. Mr. Bullock states that he ran to the back of
the woods and he changed clothes. Mr. Bullock stated he then went one way, and
Duck went the other. Mr. Bullock states
that he lost his gun. Mr. Bullock states
that the gun had some bullets in the magazine but not in the chamber or head.
And so began Terry Robinson’s journey to death row. He recently told me going to prison might have saved his life, as he wasn’t living the life he should have been at the time. He also expressed that he viewed the man who made the above statement as a son and still does in some ways.
I tried to contact Mr. Bullock repeatedly before I began this project, hoping to learn more about what happened that night, to no avail.
There wasn’t a lot presented during the trial, but it will all be looked at here.
During the trial, Mr. Bullock had a lot more to say about the events that took place that entire day, and went into detail regarding Terry Robinson and his activities on the day of the crime, Sunday, May 16, 1999 – activities Terry Robinson denies. If anybody remembers seeing Terry Robinson or Ronald Bullock at any time on Sunday, May 16, 1999, please contact me.
That’s what a homicide detective in Houston told me last
week.
Charles Mamou has spent two decades on death row for the
murder of Mary Carmouche – a crime he has always denied committing.
What the case lacks in physical evidence, it makes up for in questions. In 1999 the prosecution didn’t have much, but when they went looking for a man in connection to the murder, Mamou’s younger cousin, that man quickly told police that Mamou confessed to him. The cousin’s original recorded statement and his actual courtroom testimony are vastly different versions of the ‘confession’, and in between the two versions there also exists a letter the witness wrote saying that Mamou ‘didn’t tell me shit‘. The jury never saw that letter or a transcript of the cousin’s original statement, although a comparison of the video statement and testimony was written about on this site and can be seen here.
Letter written to Charles Mamou from his cousin – the key witness – who testified that Mamou confessed to him.
In an absence of evidence, the prosecution, with the help of Mamou’s cousin, painted a picture of Charles Mamou meant to secure a conviction – not based on evidence. Mamou was accused of crimes he was never tried for, and the jury was also shown graphic autopsy photos of a victim of a crime Charles Mamou was never charged with. They heard heartwrenching testimony from family members of victims of crimes that were not connected to Mary Carmouche.
The jury was also told by the prosecution and Mamou’s cousin
that Mamou sexually assaulted the victim, although he was never charged with
that crime. Sexual assault become part
of the picture painted by prosecutors and reported as fact in the media.
Following is one version of the sexual assault the jury heard, as described by a prosecutor in the courtroom.
“He marches her to the
back, and he makes her commit oral sodomy, makes her suck his penis. Imagine that ladies and gentlemen. That’s what he did, as she’s there. And imagine the look on her face, the terror
in her eyes and how afraid she is. She’s
only seventeen, and she doesn’t want to die.”
This year – two decades after the trial and after a recent
records request – it was learned Joyce Carter, the Chief Medical Examiner at
the time, ordered a rape kit collected when the body was discovered.
Charles Mamou never knew the kit was collected and never saw the results.
The prosecution never mentioned the rape kit during trial, although they were aware it existed and records indicate the prosecutor requested that HPD process the kit months before the trial took place. At this point in time, Charles Mamou has only just learned the rape kit existed, and has never seen the results of the processed kit.
Autopsy Evidence Request Form, received in the Lab on December 9, 1998.
Finding the results of the rape kit was only one of the reasons I flew to Texas this year. There was something else interesting revealed in the recent
HPD records request.
Two pieces of biological evidence were signed out of the lab this year – twenty years after the crime. Under ‘status’ on each of the related forms it states, ‘Report Written or to Follow’. Even more interesting, both signed out items were described as, ‘Sealed envelopes said to contain biological evidence’. Both items were signed out this year – one in April, 2019, and one in June, 2019. Both items were signed out by Mary K. Childs-Henry, who was mentioned in several articles in the Houston Chronicle in the early 2000’s. Those articles can be seen here:
Evidence signed out on April 17, 2019 and June 2, 2019
About a week after I returned home from my trip, in a phone conversation with D. Wilker at HPD – who contacted me – I was informed the rape kit was “irrelevant”. She also told me that, yes – Mary K. Childs-Henry did have the evidence in her possession at one time. I was told the evidence was now back where it belongs. I was told the evidence was not tested, as previously noted on the documentation, and that Ms. Childs-Henry had removed the evidence to ‘catalogue’ it.
The investigator who called me did not explain why biological evidence from a twenty year old case would need to be physically removed from storage to be catalogued two decades later. Not one piece – but two pieces within two months. Nor was it explained why the paperwork would say it was removed for testing – not cataloguing. It is also unclear how long the biological evidence was not located in storage, under what conditions it was stored while it was not in storage, what the evidence removed actually was, what the procedures are for chain of custody when evidence is removed from storage for cataloguing and if it was manipulated in any way while it was out of storage.
When I asked Ms. Wilker if she considered the matter closed – she informed me she did. She also told me that if the defense wanted to test something – they should have done that years ago. As stated above, Charles Mamou found out this year that a rape kit was collected.
As it stands, Charles Mamou will be executed for the murder of Mary Carmouche, a crime he has always denied committing. There is at least one relevant witnesses who was not spoken to by investigators at the time of the crime, there is a rape kit the defendant only recently learned exists and has never seen the results of, there are several contradictions in the star witness’ testimony of a confession and his original statement, as well as a letter in his own writing saying he didn’t know anything – and an overwhelming lack of evidence.
There is a timeline that makes it impossible for Charles
Mamou to have completed all he is accused of in the time it took to get from
the drug deal gone wrong, where the crime originated, and to the apartment
complex where witnesses saw him not long after.
Although I was told the ‘the rape kit is irrelevant’ by HPD, it was relevant when the prosecution requested that it be processed twenty years ago. They requested that it be processed – because they wanted to see the results. It only became ‘irrelevant’ to the state of Texas after they did see the results – results the defense has yet to see and results the jury was never aware existed.
I tried to contact the court appointed attorney that originally defended Charles Mamou as the investigator at the Houston Police Department told me that he was aware of the rape kit, but he has not responded to my requests.
Anyone with information regarding this case can contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net. Anything you share with me will be confidential.
TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU: Charles Mamou #999333 Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53 3872 South FM 350 Livingston, TX 77351
Effective August 8, 2019, Walk In Those Shoes officially
became a corporation with public charity status. Who knew this is where the path that was
cleared would lead?
The purpose of Walk In Those Shoes has always been to bring about more understanding and compassion through writing, sharing not only stories but HOW people arrived in their stories. There are crimes that may never be understood, and there are just as many that could have been predicted by an individual’s life experiences from birth – whether a lack of resources, or love, or having role models who achieved success and the ability to feed their families through crime.
Walk In Those Shoes combines the magic of healing through
writing and the true life experiences of those in prison – with the goal of
growing compassion. The end goal is a desire
for change in this overly incarcerated country, not only within prisons themselves but also in the
unbalanced scales of justice. We can
come up with solutions, and one part of that is understanding that a prison
sentence is not the definition of a person.
Over the years, positive feedback has outweighed negative by
far, although there are, on occasion, voices who object to those in prison
having a literary outlet or advocacy. To
that, I say – there is no mistake in loving and caring and speaking up for others. All comments are welcome, within the bounds
of civility, but negative comments won’t stop the compassion and advocacy that
happens here because there is no mistake in caring about people.
With that said – it’s time for another writing contest. Only those who are incarcerated are eligible to participate. The theme? SOMEONE ELSE’S SHOES.
Become an advocate.
Plead someone else’s case. It
doesn’t need to be a ‘legal’ argument, the rules are flexible. Tell us about someone you know who deserves
another chance at freedom, or medical care they are not getting, or to be
released from solitary confinement. Tell
us about a ‘good soul’ that has always had the chips stacked against him or her. You might have to talk to them about their childhood
– find out their story. Or you may
already know it. Or – your piece might
not touch on their background at all. You
make the rules – but speak up for someone in a way that makes people feel compassion. Nicknames are welcome, but if you use their
full name – get their permission to write about them, and if they choose you
can include their contact information.
However you want to go about it – help us to feel someone else’s suffering, to walk in their shoes. In 1,000 words or less – show love and compassion through your writing about – someone else. Submissions can be handwritten.
As done in our previous contest, I will narrow down the entries
to the top ten, and then hand them off to individuals to rate the writing with
a point system to determine winners.
PRIZES: It became apparent in the previous contest we
needed more than one prize.
First Place: $75 Second Place: $50 Third Place: $25
DEADLINE: December 31, 2019. Decisions will be posted on or before February 10, 2020.
COST OF ENTRY: Entry is free, but entry will be considered permission for posting on the blog and for editing – regardless of whether or not the entry wins. If the last contest is any indication, we recieved a lot of writing we wanted to share, even if they all didn’t win.
Please don’t submit previously published material.
MAILING ADDRESS:
Walk In Those Shoes Writing Contest Entry P.O. Box 70092 Henrico, Virginia 23255
In 1999 Wayne Hill, Charles Mamou’s court appointed defense attorney, thanked Mamou’s mother, Angelice, when she handed him a letter he could use to defend his client. Mamou was facing the death penalty, in a case centered on a ‘confession’ to murder. A confession Mamou said never happened. His defense attorney held in his hands a letter written by the man claiming to have heard the ‘confession’, Terrence Dodson. In the letter written to Mamou, Dodson wrote, “I’m glad you didn’t tell me shit about that cause I don’t wanna know shit, I feel better off that way.”
In addition to the letter, Wayne Hill had access to Dodson’s video statement. Police paid Terrence Dodson a visit early in the investigation when they were looking at him for his involvement in the murder. At that time, he made a video statement claiming Mamou confessed to him. Hill had access to that video, and if he watched it, he would have known all the contradictions between Dodson’s statement and his actual testimony in court.
One of the most significant contradictions was how and when
the alleged ‘confession’ took place. According
to Dodson’s video statement, Mamou called him on Tuesday morning from Louisiana
– even though Mamou wasn’t even in Louisiana on Tuesday morning – and confessed
in a single telephone conversation. Yet
on the stand, Dodson said Mamou began the confession in Texas, face to face, on
Dodson’s sister’s porch. He then went on
to say that the confession continued over a ‘couple days’ in ‘several’ conversations. That wasn’t the only contradiction Dodson
made, there were several.
Wayne Hill, the defense attorney, never entered the letter
Dodson wrote as an exhibit for his client’s trial. He never mentioned the letter,
nor did he mention Terrence Dodson’s many contradictions of his own video statement.
Terrence Dodson is Charles Mamou’s cousin. The prosecution used that relationship to
solidify their argument of guilt, pointing out that Mamou must be guilty if his
own family would testify against him.
They wanted another cousin of Mamou’s to testify as well. That would make the ‘relative’ argument stronger. The only problem with the other cousin, Anthony Trail, was, he didn’t know anything about the night in question. He wasn’t there, and no one had told him anything about what had happened to the victim. He had no desire to get involved because he didn’t have any relevant information to add. The prosecution wanted him involved though. At one point, while being questioned, he had decided he would not testify. Then a man came into the room. According to Trail, he believed the man was the victim’s father, and that was the impression he was given. The man proceeded to persuade Trail to get involved and eventually Trail agreed to testify. We will probably never know if it was actually the victim’s father who persuaded him or someone that was just trying to give that impression. Trail’s testimony added nothing material to the trial because Trail had no knowledge of what happened that night nor had anyone shared with him a ‘confession’. The prosecution didn’t ask him those things on the stand, but rather used him as another ‘family member’ who testified against Mamou. They asked Trail about some sunglasses Mamou and he had picked up the day after the murder, leaving the impression the glasses were some type of evidence, but it was never pointed out for the jury by the prosecution – or defense – that the glasses they picked up were nearly five miles from the crime scene.
Throughout the Mamou trial a sexual assault was repeatedly referred
to for the majority female jury. Although
it was presented as important in the courtroom, outside of the courtroom there was
no urgency to find out if any sexual assault actually occurred that night. Dr. Joyce Carter ordered a rape kit to be done
when the body was found, to include oral swabs, fibers, clothing, fingernail
scrapings, etc. On December 11, 1998, those
items were picked up by an HPD officer and placed in the HPD property room
freezer. There they sat. The rape kit was not ordered to be processed
until long after Charles Mamou was in custody. Eight months after the crime, on July 8, 1999,
and shortly before Mamou’s trial the D.A.’s office requested the rape kit be
processed by the HPD crime lab. The
results – no semen was detected on any items analyzed.
Although the District Attorney’s office ordered the test processed and was given the results, graphic references to sexual assault were repeatedly used throughout the trial, in what appeared to be an effort to inflame the jury – although Mamou was never charged with sexual assault. There was never any evidence a sexual assault took place by anyone, according to the incident report.
Mamou’s defense team left the sexual assault accusations
without argument, never telling the jury that a rape kit was processed months
after the crime that turned up nothing.
Also of note, ‘hairs were collected from the t-shirt’ of the
victim. The hairs were never mentioned
by the prosecution or the defense. It appears they are still in the HPD property
room.
Charles Mamou always maintained his innocence, and the only
witness statements available support his account of his whereabouts that night,
although a couple statements appear to be currently missing as of an Open
Records Request done this year. What is
known is – the victim and Charles Mamou were both on Lantern Point Drive at
approximately 12:00 midnight on the night of December 6, 1998. On that point, all accounts are in
agreement. After a drug deal gone wrong, Mamou and Samuel
Johnson drove away in two separate cars, with the victim in the backseat of the
car Mamou was driving.
Charles Mamou says both men drove to an apartment complex on
Fondren where he was staying while he was in Houston – about a ten mile
drive. That is also the location where Johnson
lived.
A witness statement taken from the woman who lived at the apartment
where Mamou stayed that night indicates Mamou was back at her apartment at
approximately 12:45. In her statement
she spoke of waking up at “about 12:15 AM.”
She then says, “It seem like was around thirty minutes later I heard a
knock on the door.” She goes on to say, “I
asked my brother who was at the door. He
told me it was Chucky.”
That statement indicates that Mamou was exactly where he
said he was forty-five minutes later.
Unfortunately – the jury never knew that statement existed and that
information was never presented to them by Mamou’s defense team.
During the trial the woman’s husband, Howard Scott, testified
and when questioned he was shown his own statement, “when you say Mr. Mamou got
there, does reviewing that statement specifically refresh your memory that it
was 12:15 and 12:45?”
Scott’s answer, “Yes.”
Question, “Okay. So
you’re positive it couldn’t have been later than 12:45?”
And the answer, “No, sir.”
Two witnesses who had no reason to defend or support Charles
Mamou both supported exactly what Mamou said happened. The body of the victim was found on
Lynchester Drive, a location that was about thirty minutes from the Lantern
Point Drive location where the drug deal gone wrong took place. The prosecution’s version of a sexual assault,
murder, and dropping sunglasses at a location on Ashford Point Drive – couldn’t
have been done in 45 minutes. The time
constraints were never outlined for the jury.
There is something else very troubling about Howard Scott’s
testimony. The statement he was shown
while on the witness stand – is not in the case file as of the recent Records
Request.
Howard Scott made two statements to police – one on Tuesday, December 8, and one on Wednesday, December 9. The incident report, received through an Open Records Request only includes one statement. The Incident Report refers to the ‘missing’ statement on December 8, “It was then decided to bring Howard Scott to the homicide office to be interviewed there since there were some discrepancies between his story and Robin’s. Officer Hollins then transported Howard Scott to the homicide office where he was interviewed by Sergeant Novak.” This interview is not in the incident file that was received pursuant to the Open Records Request.
The missing interview is mentioned more than once. It is also referred to later in the incident
report, stating that at 9:45 on Wednesday, December 9, Sergeants Yanchak and
Ferguson went to pick up Robin and Howard Scott to be ‘re-interviewed’.
It is referred to again, “On this date, Sergeant Yanchack
and Sergeant Ferguson assisted Sergeant G.J. Novak and Officer H.F. Chisolm in
the follow up investigation into this offense.
Earlier this date, we had ‘re-interviewed’
two witnesses named Robin Marie Scott and her husband, Howard Scott.”
Even on Page 3 of Howard Scott’s statement taken on Wednesday, December 9, 1998, he refers to the interview the day before, on Tuesday, December 8, 1998, “Around 11:30 AM two detectives showed up and began asking me about Chucky. I told them that Chucky left earlier and gave them permission to search my house. I later came with them to the homicide division.”
But, Howard Scott’s first statement did at one time exist and was also referred to in the court transcripts when Wayne Hill asked Scott to look at it and refresh his memory. The second statement of Howard Scott’s makes no reference to when Mamou arrived back at his apartment, so the statement referred to in court is the one that is now currently missing from the file.
There are other things that appear to be missing from the
file, unless the detectives did not document their work. According to a News Release put out by the
Houston Police Department shortly after the crime, “A second suspect drove away
in what was initially described as a red Dodge Intreped. It has since been determined the vehicle was
an orange Dodge Concorde that was recovered
and inspected.” The news release
referred to the vehicle that Samuel Johnson was driving that night.
During the trial Johnson was specifically asked about that
car. “Did the police then examine your
car?”
Johnson, “They examined it a couple of days after I got out
of jail.”
Although there are photographs of the vehicle in the file,
there is no written report or documentation regarding what was found in the
vehicle.
According to Samuel Johnson, a resident of Houston as well
as an employee of Orkin at the time, he went home after the drug deal, drank a
soda, took a shower and went to bed, not even disturbing his wife to tell her
of his involvement in a shoot out on a dark alley. And
there is no documentation other than photographs of anything that was
discovered inside of the vehicle he was driving.
Other documentation not included in the file are any notes or statements made by other parties located at the apartment complex that night, including interviews of Shawn Eaglin. Eaglin was an integral part of introducing several of the parties according to statements, and the police spoke to him. But there are no statements or interview notes in the file regarding interviews of him. As with the vehicle documentation, there is no way to know if the detectives chose not to document their work or if the documents have been removed from the file. But, according to Robin Scott’s statement, she discussed with Eaglin the homicide division going to her home, Shawn’s home, and the employer of Shawn’s cousin, ‘Ced’.
According to Robin Scott’s and Howard Scott’s statements,
Eaglin was at the apartment complex on the night in question and it would be
expected that detectives spoke to him. Unfortunately, there is no record of those
conversations.
In addition to the impossibility of the 45 minute window of time – it is highly unlikely Mamou could have located the backyard of the house for sale on Lynchester Drive where the body was found. He was from Louisiana, and not a resident of Houston. In the Houston Police Department’s incident report, the location was described by a detectives as follows, “The 9200 block of Lynchester Street is located in the Keagan’s Woods sub-division located on the south side of the 14000 block of Bissonnet Street in Harris County. The Keegan’s Woods subdivision is best accessed by turning south onto Bering Wood Street and continuing south to Plantation Valley and then turning west on Plantation Valley. Lynchester Street intersects with Plantation Valley. Lynchester Street does not intersect with Bissonnet and is a difficult street to locate.” That is how a HPD detective described the location, and an investigator recently told me she had difficulty locating it, even with her GPS.
The ability of Charles Mamou, a resident of Louisiana, to
have found the location was never brought up by Mamou’s defense attorney for
the jury.
For whatever reason, Charles Mamou’s defense team did not present most of the above information. The jury wasn’t left with a lot to consider regarding Mamou’s innocence. As unusual as this may sound – they were given a lot more than in a typical trial. The jury was shown autopsy photos and heard painful, heart wrenching testimony from family members of victims of crimes Mamou was never charged with. As unbelievable as that may sound – it happened. Mamou’s mother, Angelice, was on the elevator with some jurors when she heard them discussing how they were going to decide. It was agreed by the jurors she overheard that they would, ‘vote with the majority’. Ms. Mamou reported what she overheard at the time it happened, but nothing came of it.
They say truth is stranger than fiction. Charles Mamou has been in prison for twenty
years, most of it in solitary confinement on death row. Blind faith in the courts is often
misplaced. According to the National
Registry of Exonerations, the number of exonerations is currently at
2,488. It would be a good bet that a
state such as Texas, that executes numerous people a year – has executed innocent
people. If the witnesses are to be
believed in the Mamou case, there will be one more when he is executed. He couldn’t have done the things he will die
for in the time allotted for him to do it.
There is not one shred of physical evidence putting him at the scene of
the crime. There is not a weapon to
test. There is not a footprint at the
scene. There is not a fingerprint at the
scene. The jury was shown photographs
and heard testimony from crimes Mamou was never charged with. Mamou was portrayed as having sexually
assaulted someone without a shred of evidence and his attorney did not point
that out. There was substantial evidence
to call into question the testimony of the key witness who said Mamou
confessed, that was never presented by the defense. There are ‘hairs’ that no one seems
concerned to follow up on. There was no
independent lab testing ever done by the defense. There is documentation that was either
never filed or is no longer accounted for – in addition to a statement that at
one time existed – but seems to have disappeared.
It reminds me of something I heard recently – close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. Can we add ‘or in a courtroom’ with a public defender, the wrong skin color, the wrong year, the wrong state…
Anyone with information regarding this case can contact me at kimberleycarter@verizon.net. Anything you share with me will be confidential.
TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU: Charles Mamou #999333 Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53 3872 South FM 350 Livingston, TX 77351
When a person comes up for parole in Alabama, they don’t get a chance to speak for themselves and aren’t present when their fate is decided. A lot is left out of the equation. Some of the reasons for Louis Singleton’s most recent denial – ‘Release will depreciate seriousness of offense or promote disrespect for the law’, ‘Severity of present offense is high’, ‘ORAS level is moderate risk of reoffending’.
What they
probably didn’t discuss…
On January
11, 1994, Louis Singleton was seventeen years old and still attending high
school when he shot three men in a McDonald’s parking lot, killing one, and
paralyzing another. He was sentenced to
life – with the possibility of
parole. He has since been denied parole
four times and has been incarcerated for a quarter century. The Parole Board will revisit his case in
January of 2023.
Prior to the
shooting, Singleton had been the sort of kid most parents would be proud
of. Boys will be boys, but his life was on
track and he had positive goals. He had
a speeding ticket once because he was driving too fast to get to summer
school. He also got in a fight when he
was sixteen.
The
neighborhood knew Louis as a ‘good kid’ who dreamed of football
superstardom. He might not have been the
most academically focused, but he had goals and maintaining some standard of
education was required, so he towed the line.
After his arrest he was evaluated by the Strickland Youth Center, who
determined he ‘did not appear to be a behavioral problem’. In the transcripts, he was described as
enjoying a ‘favorable reputation within his community’. Louis Singleton wasn’t known as a threat to
others then – and he hasn’t been known as a threat to others since his
incarceration. He did have a problem at the time though – a threat was pursuing
him.
One of
Singleton’s close friends, Derrick Conner, was dating another man’s
ex-girl. By association, Singleton
became a target of that man’s anger. Had
it happened today, things would most likely not have gotten as far as they did
twenty five years ago.
Over the many months prior to the shooting, Louis Singleton was shot at on several occasions by the ‘ex-boyfriend’, Kendrick Martin, and his friend, Nelson Tucker. On one occasion, Singleton was inside a car when Martin was beating the vehicle with a crow bar. Louis recalls one time when Martin pulled a gun from a book bag and pointed it at his head.
The violence and bullying were no secret. Louis Singleton tried to get it to stop by talking to parents, school officials and even the police. Nothing was resolved, and on that winter night in that parking lot when Louis ran into Kendrick Martin and his friends – no one will ever know exactly what happened, but the boy who had been shot at and pursued for months – shot at those who had been terrorizing him.
But for the months leading up to that night – it never would have happened. Louis Singleton would have continued living his normal, average life. The entire incident is tragic. It’s tragic for the man who died. It’s tragic for the man who will never walk again. And it’s tragic for the seventeen year old kid who didn’t know how to deal with something he should have never had to. The adults who were aware of what was going on not only let Singleton down – but the victims as well.
Louis Singleton has spent a quarter of a century in the brutal Alabama prison system. He lost all his dreams. He lost his youth. He lost his mother and has lived with the regret and memory of having to tell her what he did that night.
Some feel no
amount of time will suffice. Forgiveness
will never come for those. Remorse has
though.
Louis Singleton today.
Alabama prisons are barbaric. A typical prison is an inhumane warehouse of people, many dangerous, bodies packed in on top of one another in a sea of bunks, sheets hanging to try and give a semblance of privacy, a random individual laying on the floor at any given moment, having taken whatever they can get their hands on to escape the reality of their nonexistence, and there is not a moment that goes by you aren’t aware you have no value. Your life can be lost in the blink of an eye.
In the
southern heat, there is no air conditioning and very limited staff. As someone once told me – the inmates police
themselves. In spite of the place he
lives, Singleton has not had a disciplinary action that involved violence since
2010, when he got in trouble for ‘Fighting Without A Weapon’.
Before the
hearing this year, Singleton was hopeful.
The board doesn’t think he’s suffered enough yet though. One look in his eyes would tell them
different, but they will never see him.
He’s exists only on paper to them.
A couple years ago, Singleton shared what happened right after the
shooting.
“My mind was racing with thoughts that I couldn’t even grasp
mentally. I just went home and sat in the house with all the lights out,
scared to move, don’t know what to do nor to say. My mom was gone to a
choir convention in Mississippi during the time of the incident. While I
sat in our house quietly and somberly in the front room, my mother pulled up
with no clue of what just happened. When she came in the door,
turned to lock the door, I was sitting there in the dark room. I scared
her out of her wits. As a mother who knew her child, she instantly asked
me, ‘Boy, what’s wrong with you sitting in here with all the lights out?’
I was so discombobulated I honestly couldn’t speak, it seemed like somebody had
my soul…”
Those are the thoughts of a seventeen year old boy – who has suffered enough. The wrong will never be made right, and that seventeen year old boy no longer exists. He’s paid the price. Those who let it get that far never did – but Louis Singleton did. My heart goes out to those who have been touched by this tragedy. More suffering won’t heal that pain.
Would I even be writing this if Louis Singleton had been a promising white high school athlete? I doubt it. The school and authorities would have resolved the issues long before they got to that point.
Louis Singleton can be contacted at: Louis Singleton #179665 0-24 Donaldson CF 100 Warrior Lane Bessemer, AL 35023-7299
Robert Booker isn’t just any author of seven urban fiction novels. He’s bigger than that. He’s a symbol what can happen if we acknowledge the justice system is flawed, and we can do better.
I wrote about Booker in February, 2016, because he once had a life sentence with no possibility of parole – for a nonviolent crime. I sent him a copy of what I posted. He wrote back. The next thing I knew, he was publishing novels – six in the short time I’ve known him, with countless others yet to be published. He accomplished what many writers dream about with only a pencil and paper. And he did it, not expecting to get out any time soon.
Robert Booker isn’t an incarcerated author anymore. He’s a free author. He once inspired me to write about his unjust sentence – he now inspires me to write about what can happen when wrongs are made right. There is only one Robert Booker, as he would tell you, but there are others like him who deserve this same kind of chance.
Robert Booker went to prison June 29, 1994, but this week – he’s the picture of righting wrongs. He’s the picture of a man who is free thanks in good part to a commutation from President Obama and also the First Step Act.
I can’t wait to see what he does next, and I know I will return to this page often – just to watch this and remember what we’re doing right.
My Best Friends Are Behind Bars – that’s going to be the title of my book someday. And some of them are innocent…
I’m not naïve. I work
with a lot of people who have done a lot of bad things. They live with regret. Most of them did ‘something’. People get exonerated all the time though,
and statistically, it was bound to happen – I would find myself working with
some innocent people. What’s fascinating
– my innocent friends didn’t tell me
they were innocent. Our writing
relationships were the focus, but when my instincts tell me something doesn’t add
up, I want to know more.
This week I heard the federal government was going to resume
executing people. That news hurt my heart.
An attorney once told me during a discussion about the flaws in the
system, justice is like the highway.
People want to have highways even if they result in lives lost in auto
accidents. She explained it’s the same with
justice. People are willing to have our
system of control, even if we lose some people to the ‘mistakes’. Collateral damage.
I don’t see it that way – there’s no arguable need for the death
penalty. Every state, every country,
that executes – executes the innocent as well as the guilty. That’s just a fact. Is a ‘tough on crime’ stance worth the
mistakes when the mistakes are human lives?
One of my favorite writers, Terry Robinson, lives on Death Row. He’s never written about being innocent. After I came to realize he wasn’t capable of
what he was there for, I asked him why he didn’t openly speak of it. He told me he felt it would be disrespectful
to the victim of the crime he was incarcerated for to write about that. That’s the type of man he is. He has such a quiet dignity and respect for
others, I can think of no one who compares.
It’s because of that character I asked to see his transcripts. I got some clarity as I read. He was no angel, and he has never claimed to be. But the core of who he is was always there. The night of the crime, Mr. Robinson was ‘in the area’. He was black. Another individual who was arrested in connection to the murder said Mr. Robinson did it. That’s all it took. That individual is now living a free life.
When it came time for Mr. Robinson to present his defense, I was anxious to read that portion of the transcripts. I had read everything the prosecution laid out, and I thought there was a lot left unknown – not to mention DNA that wasn’t tied to anyone. I was anxious to hear what would be revealed during the next portion of the trial. I pictured myself, facing a death sentence, and how I would present everything possible, how I could call into question so many things that had been shared. He would surely tell of where he was and who he was with. He would contradict the key witness. After all – it was a trial that could result in a death sentence.
What I read next, stunned me. “Judge, we have consulted with the defendant,
and it’s his choice not to present evidence at this time.”
I had to reread it…
What?
The next time I spoke to Mr. Robinson, I asked, “So… You didn’t present any defense. Am I to understand that correctly? Why?”
He explained to me how his attorneys told him that if he
defended himself it would make him look guilty – so the defense presented
nothing.
What has me scratching my head in confusion will have him executed.
Terry Robinson was sentenced to death.
The individuals who had a hand in restarting the federal death machine would obtain the best legal representation available in a criminal case – because they have the means to do that. But – what about those who are a minority? What about those who are black and convicted in a southern state with all that we know goes hand in hand with that? What about those whose attorneys are appointed by the Court? There is an enormous difference between an attorney that is shopped for and one that is operating under a set fee by the courts while also carrying paying clients. If an attorney has paying clients – the court appointed cases go to the bottom of the stack. That’s reality.
Terry Robinson has so much character it can’t be covered up with a red Death Row jumpsuit. Mr. Robinson writes under the pen name Chanton. His essay, ‘Being Better’, which he wrote earlier this year, speaks of accidentally stealing forty dollars nearly two decades ago – and how he was driven to confess that mistake. ‘Duck’, Chanton, Terry, Mr. Robinson – is ‘collateral damage’.
It’s okay to say it – you are innocent. You have every right to say it. You are not the first person to be incarcerated for something you didn’t do. You are not the first person on Death Row to know you don’t belong there. There are other people who know you don’t belong there. Your previous mistakes in life don’t make you deserving of this. The loss that is the reason for this discussion is not diminished by you speaking truth. Truth is never a mistake. And the truth is – some innocent people live on death row, and may very well die there.
Mr. Robinson can be contacted at: Terry Robinson #0349019 Central Prison 4285 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-4285
Anybody with information related to his case can contact me
at kimberleycarter@verizon.net. Anything you share with me will be
confidential.
