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.
In Harris County, Texas, 1999, Charles Mamou was sentenced to death in a trial primarily focused on the testimony of a handful of drug dealers involved in the same drug deal, the strongest testimony coming from Mamou’s own cousin who testified Mamou confessed to him.
There were several factors the jury never heard regarding the
alleged ‘confession’.
When Terrence Dodson first heard police had contacted one of his relatives looking for him in connection to a capital murder case, he quickly told police his cousin, Chucky, had confessed to murdering and sexually assaulting the victim. Charles Mamou was arrested for kidnapping and murder.
Nearly a year later at trial, what the case lacked in physical evidence, it made up for in the ‘confession’, at times focusing on the sexual assault Terrence Dodson had described to police. The jury was never presented all the contradictions between Mr. Dodson’s original statement to police and his actual testimony at trial, including the location of Mamou when he supposedly confessed and also how he confessed. Those contradictions would have brought into question Dodson’s credibility and can be seen HERE.
The jury was also not shown the letter Dodson wrote to his cousin a month after he told police about the ‘confession’. In the letter Dodson said, “I’m glad you didn’t tell me shit about that cause I don’t wanna know shit, I feel better off that way.”
There was one more thing the jury never heard. Charles Mamou was never charged with rape, but it had a significant impact in his trial, so much so that several articles written about the crime indicate that Mamou raped or sexually assaulted the victim. The sexual assault was one facet of Terrence Dodson’s hour long video statement. Dodson described how Mamou confessed to a sexual assault several times and also testified to that during the trial. During Dodson’s testimony, Charles Mamou’s court appointed attorney and the prosecution never informed the jury that a rape kit was completed on the victim, including oral swabs.
When the prosecution was presenting their closing arguments, hoping to convince the jury of Mamou’s guilt and secure an execution, the jury was told, “He marches her to the back, and he makes her commit oral sodomy, makes her suck his penis. Imagine that, ladies and gentlemen.” At the time they made this argument, they were aware of Terrence Dodson’s questionable credibility. They also knew the results from the rape kit, which stated, “No semen was detected on any items analyzed.”
Mamou’s own attorney never mentioned the results of the rape kit to the jury that was to decide his client’s fate.
Harris County, Texas, has sentenced more people to death than anyplace else in the country. Charles Mamou is one of those people. He maintains his innocence and is out of appeals and awaiting an execution date.
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
The key piece of evidence in a capital murder case leaves one wondering how much of a trial is built on the talent of a prosecution to ‘paint a picture’ – and how much is based on reality.
Charles Mamou was sentenced to die twenty years ago in Harris County, Texas, for the death of Mary Carmouche. He was black, tried in a county that sentenced people to death at an unrivaled rate, and couldn’t afford an attorney of his choosing. When the courts determined his fate, people went on with their lives, assuming justice had been done.
But had it?
The victim had been present at a drug deal that went
terribly wrong, her body later found by a utility worker.
There were several people involved in the drug deal that took place that night, including one man who died at the scene. Those who survived were evasive when questioned by police – all but one. One of the drug dealers was very cooperative and investigators interviewed him at length. The young man was Charles Mamou’s very own cousin – a man the prosecution referred to repeatedly, arguing that the accused’s own family testified against him. Why would his own family lie?
What’s more bizarre than why a twenty-one year old drug dealer being looked at in a capital murder case would lie – is why someone will be executed on the weight of his testimony. Dodson had a lot to say – not a lot of it matched facts. But without a weapon, an eye witness, DNA, any physical evidence connecting Mamou to the crime scene – they wanted a ‘confession’. Watching the video today, twenty years later, it’s clear the ‘confession’ used to convict Charles Mamou was riddled with inconsistency.
Terrence Dodson started out by assuring investigators he would never be involved in a drug transaction.
Terrence Dodson said he just wanted to go home and not be involved with any type of illegal activity.
Those original statements directly contradicted what he later said at trial.
Q: And how did you come to meet him or be with him that morning? A: Well, he gave me a call and told me that he had a lick for a key. So I said, come get me.
Q: What did you think was actually going to happen? A: That they was going to bring the kilo, we were going to bring newspaper, and we was going to rob them. Q: What was your part going to be? A: My part in the robbery? Q: Right. A: To rob them. Q: With what? A: With a gun. Q: You had a gun? A: Yeah, I had it on me.
Q. What if there is more than one or two people there? Is that going to be a problem for you? A. No, not really. Q. You’re comfortable going in a situation like that with a gun, and if somebody shows you the dope, you just going to take the dope? A. Pretty much.
Over and over, Terrence Dodson testified to his involvement in the drug deal, contradicting his original statement to police.
When Terrence Dodson first spoke to police on Wednesday, December 9, 1998, it took over an hour. He was asked several times what day Charles Mamou had left Houston for his home in Louisiana. Dodson told investigators Mamou left on Monday, December 7.
Although Dodson said Mamou left on Monday, according to the Houston Police Department’s own incident report – Charles Mamou left Houston on Tuesday, December 8, 1998.
Then, Dodson told investigators about the ‘confession’ – which he said took place in a phone call from Charles Mamou on Tuesday morning – from Louisiana. It would have been hard for Mamou to call Dodson from Louisiana on Tuesday morning – because the investigation’s own witnesses stated Mamou was actually in Houston on Tuesday morning, but that didn’t concern investigators, the prosecution or his defense attorney. Mamou had actually spent Monday night in the apartment of one of the prosecution’s own witnesses, Howard Scott.
Terrence Dodson then proceeded to share what he says was a confession to murder.
In his statement to police, Terrence Dodson shares a story of Mamou calling him on Tuesday morning from Louisiana, when in reality Charles Mamou wasn’t even in Louisiana, and confessing to him in one phone call. Months later, at trial, he told a different story.
Q. Now, when you are having this conversation with the defendant later on – says, ‘Later on I spoke with Charles’ – are you face to face? A. Yes. Q. Where are you? A. On the porch. Q. Whose porch? A. Stephanie’s porch, my sister. Q. Now you gave a whole lot of information in response to the prosecutor’s questions about conversations you had with Charles and go into detail about the jack on jack and these guys with a Bible. There was a shoot-out and goes into detail about where the people were shooting and everything. And then, also talking about the girl had been shot, that they had been outside. And he asked you about talking with Detective Novak, and she supposedly had performed oral sex on him. When do you get that information? What time is that? A. I don’t really recall. I got, like I said, bits and pieces in person.
Q. Is it one conversation or several? A. It was several. Q. Over what period of time? A. I don’t really recall, a couple of days. Q. So, it’s not just Monday, it’s Monday and Tuesday? A. To the best of my knowledge, yeah.
Yet – in his taped statement – Dodson claimed Charles confessed to him in one phone call on Tuesday morning from Louisiana, a time when Charles Mamou wasn’t in Louisiana.
Friends and relatives of Mamou’s have told me Mamou would never have shared his business with his cousin, Terrence. But, Terrence was willing to testify to a confession, so he was very valuable in the investigation – even with an odd version of events that didn’t match any of the available information or witness accounts. He even said the drug deal shooting began inside the car. As everyone knows – including the witnesses, police, prosecution and defense – it didn’t happen inside the car.
The drug deal and shooting actually took place outside the car. And none of the people there described a bag of money being thrown back and forth. That version is far from believable, even without any of the witnesses. But Terrence Dodson was giving investigators a confession, no matter how far-fetched it might sound. Not only was it a ‘confession’ it was one by a cousin – why would a cousin lie?
With regard to the victim – Dodson had an even more bizarre story to tell. One moment he described the girl as ‘scared’ and his cousin was trying to calm her down – and in the next moment he actually told investigators that she said, “I ain’t fixin to suck your dick for under $300.”
The victim’s body was later found in a neighborhood Charles Mamou, who was from Louisiana, would not have been familiar with, in the backyard of a house that was for sale. That is not how Terrence described the location though. He said in his statement that it was behind some abandoned houses, some for sale houses.
At one point it seemed the investigators were trying to help him include something they wanted him to add to his statement.
Again – the detective appeared to want this detail in the statement and again asked the leading question.
There wasn’t much about Dodson’s statement that lined up with what the other parties involved had to say. Even Dodson’s description of Mamou’s sunglasses that the prosecution presented as being connected to Mary. The glasses were nearly five miles from the body – but that was never told to the jury. In Dodson’s version of the story – the glasses were broken, ‘lenses gone and everything’. Anthony Trail and Charles Mamou, who had no reason to lie about the condition of glasses, both described the glasses as not being broken, and they were the ones who picked them up.
Terrence Dodson spoke to police for over an hour. A month after this statement to police was made, he wrote a letter to his cousin, Charles Mamou, who was in prison. In the letter he 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.”
Charles Mamou was repeatedly accused of sexual assault during the trial and has repeatedly asked for any DNA testing that should have taken place if there was a sexual assault, as he knows it wouldn’t match him.
During the punishment phase of Mamou’s trail, autopsy photos of individuals other than Mary were shared, as well as testimony from family members of other murder victims. Charles Mamou has never been tried for any other murder.
I have tried to contact Terrence Dodson on several occasions, but he has not responded.
Charles Mamou is out of appeals and currently awaits an execution date.
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
Charles Mamou has never wavered in declaring his innocence, but the key witness at his trial testified that Mamou ‘confessed’ to him. In a case without a weapon, or a fingerprint at the scene, or a hair, or a fiber, or DNA, or an eyewitness, or a violent history – the testimony of Terrence Dodson was a key factor in Mamou’s death sentence. But, in matters of life and death, should claims of ‘confessions’ be held to a reasonable standard of reliability?
Dodson wasn’t just an uninvolved witness. According to his own testimony, he clearly had
reason to be concerned about his well-being.
When asked, “Were you a little
concerned about the fact that you might be charged with a crime?”
“Yes.”
“But you don’t have
that concern now, do you?”
“No.”
Over and over, Dodson maintained his understanding that he had
a lot at stake.
“And at that point in
time, what exactly are you thinking at the time that you were picked up by the
police? Is it clear to you that they are
looking at you as a suspect for capital murder?”
“Yeah, it was clear to
me.”
“So, at that point, is
it a fair statement to say you’re very concerned about your future and what
might happen to you?”
“Yeah, it’s a fair
statement.”
Dodson knew the gravity of the situation and the possible consequences to himself. That would be enough to make one wonder if his testimony regarding Mamou’s ‘confession’ could be relied upon, but self-preservation wasn’t the only issue that would bring into question everything that Dodson shared in the courtroom. There were also contrasts between his original statement to police and what he testified to during the trial.
During the police interview, Dodson repeatedly said he had
nothing to do with the drug deal that took place that night. He simply wanted to go home.
“He told me that he
was going to buy a kilo – coke, and I was like, man, take me home because I don’t
want to be around the transaction or whatever.”
“So, him and Bud
started looking at me saying just chill out man, chill out, man, you are
tripping, I was like, man, no, just take me back to the house, that’s all I am
asking.”
“And he kept saying, just
chill, we got out there. I’m like, oh
man, just take me back.”
“And I am like, just
take me back, man, I am not with all that.”
Yet, during the trial, when asked about his involvement in
the drug deal, Dodson describes it differently.
“What was your part
going to be?”
“My part in the
robbery?”
“Right.”
“To rob them.”
“With what?”
“With a gun.”
“You had a gun?”
“Yeah, I had it on me.”
“So, what is it that
you’re supposed to do, you, personally?
What is your role on this jack on jack?
Of course, you’re not knowing
that it’s a jack on jack at that point, are you?”
“Exactly.”
“So, what is your
role? What are you supposed to do?”
“Once I see the dope,
I pull out my pistol and take the dope.”
“You’re comfortable going
in a situation like that with a gun; and if somebody shows you the dope you
just going to take the dope?”
“Pretty much.”
The star witness consistently contradicted himself and his
prior recorded statement. While being
questioned by detectives, Dodson described Mamou’s ‘confession’ as taking place
in one phone call.
“Ok, and where was he
calling you from?”
“He said, Louisiana,
but we don’t have a caller I.D., so he said, what’s up? I said, what’s up? He said, what’s going on? I said, there is nothing going on, what’s
up? He said, have been watching the
news? I say, yeah. He said, man, he just started telling what
went down, that he, in so many words, did it, and I like, man, and he told me
step by step how it went down.”
Dodson lived in Houston, and Mamou lived in Louisiana. Dodson told police that after Mamou returned to his home in Louisiana, he called Dodson and confessed. Yet – at trial, Dodson changed his story, describing how the confession took place differently.
“Now you gave a whole
lot of information in response to the prosecutor’s questions about conversations
you had with Charles and go into detail about the jack on jack and these guys
had a bible. There was a shoot-out and
goes into detail about where the people were shot and everything. And then, also talking about the girl had
been shot, that they had been outside.
And he asked you about talking with Detective Novack, and she supposedly
had performed oral sex on him. When did
you get that information? What time is that?”
“I don’t really
recall, I got, like I said, bits and pieces in person.”
“Everything that you
said here in court today, you’re attributing to him?”
“Yeah, everything I
said that was told to me was told to me by him.”
“It is one conversation
or several?”
“It was several.”
“Over what period of
time?”
“I don’t really
recall, a couple days.”
Terrence Dodson didn’t just contradict himself throughout his statement and testimony. He also told a version of the drug deal during his statement to police that no one else did. According to him, Mamou confessed to getting into the Lexus before the shooting. He clearly describes the violence taking place inside the car. He also paints a picture of two drug dealers throwing a bag of ‘money’ back and forth between them.
“So the dude that drove the Lexus approached Chuckie or whatever, so this is how we are going to do it, you gonna ride with my boy in my Lexus, and you all do the business and we gonna stay here with Bud or Buk whatever. So, Chuckie was like, no, no, I don’t even like the way that sounds. So, if I am going to do the business, is going to be with you, because you are the one I talked to. So the dude must have said, they all loaded up in other words, and the dude told Chuckie we are fixin to do the business down the dark street, so Chuckie said you want to do it in front of Bennigans, but the dude said, it is too hot over here. So they went down the dark street. Dude asked Chuckie where is the money? So, Chuckie said, I got the money, and threw him the paper bag, whatever. The dude threw it back, so Chuckie said, what’s up? The dude said, take the money out, I want to see it. Chuckie said the money is right here, threw back at him. Chuckie said, by that time, he see the dude flinch – like moving into his seat. Chuckie said, he came out with his pistol and was like, man, what’s going on, and the dude was pulling for his. He said, he just thought something, and shot him up on whatever and burnt off with the girl in the Lexus.”
“His exact words were,
shit, I threw him the money, and he threw it back. I threw him the money again,
and he threw it back, know what I’m sayin’, and that’s when I threw down to see
what’s goin’ on.”
The two witnesses and participants in the drug deal, Charles
Mamou, and the police have established that the drug deal and shooting took
place outside of the vehicle. None of
the other individuals described a bag being thrown back and forth.
Not long after Terrence Dodson told the police that Charles
Mamou ‘confessed’ to him, he wrote a letter to Mamou. In it, Dodson once again contradicts himself,
writing, “I’m glad you didn’t tell me
shit about that, cause I don’t wanna know shit.
I feel better off that way.”
Charles Mamou is currently on death row in Texas and waiting
for his execution date.
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
Charles Mamou had a fifteen to forty-five minute window to do what the prosecution said he did, according to their witness, Howard Scott. By everyone’s account, Mamou was on Lantern Point Drive at approximately midnight on December 6, 1998. Scott testified he was back at his apartment on Fondren between 12:15 and 12:45. Could he have murdered the victim in forty-five minutes or less?
At midnight that evening, there was a drug deal on Lantern
Point Drive in Houston that ended in gunfire.
The majority of the witnesses testified that Mamou’s driver, Samuel
Johnson, pulled away when the shooting began, leaving Mamou behind. Mamou then jumped in the running vehicle left
behind by the individuals he’d just had a shoot out with.
After that – the stories differ. Mamou testified he realized Mary Carmouche was in the car after he fled the scene. He also says he saw her for the last time after they both exited the car at the apartment on Fondren, where the vehicle was later found by police. Mamou also said there were several other people at that location who had contact with Miss Carmouche.
The drug deal took place at approximately midnight. The drive from Lantern Point Drive to Fondren
is 9.3 miles and 18 minutes. When the
police later recovered the Lexis at the apartments, one of the tires was completely
flat and partially off the rim. Howard
Scott testified that Mamou arrived at his apartment between 12:15 and 12:45
that evening.
The state presented a different version of events. The prosecution claimed Mamou, who lived in Louisiana,
left Lantern Point Drive after the shooting and drove to a deserted home on
Lynchester Drive, located 17.9 miles away.
They say he then took Mary into the backyard, forced her to perform oral
sex and shot her. No explanation was
offered as to how Mamou may have been able to locate an abandoned home on
Lynchester.
There was no evidence introduced in the courtroom regarding a sexual assault – not a hair, not a semen sample, no DNA. After the shooting, Mamou would have had to drive from the house on Lynchester to the apartments on Fondren and park the car where it was found. The drive from Lynchester to Fondren takes thirty minutes.
That scenario would have taken an hour and five minutes in
driving time, not taking into account the condition of the tire, locating a deserted
home, a sexual assault and murder. The
travel time to get to the crime scene was never addressed during the trial.
The Mamou case is riddled with questions. For many, it calls into question the concept of ‘innocent until proven guilty’. Among the areas of concern:
Although the jury was told Mamou sexually assaulted the
victim, he was never charged with sexual
assault and there was no physical evidence to support that claim.
Each of the parties involved in the drug transaction
testified against Mamou, and it appears none
were charged.
The only witness who came close to putting Mamou near the
crime scene testified that Mamou confessed to him. That same witness later wrote a letter to
Mamou while he was incarcerated stating, “I’m glad you didn’t tell me shit
about that cause I don’t wanna know shit, I feel better off that way.” The
jury never saw that letter.
The state’s witnesses all
contradicted themselves and each other throughout the trial, as well as all
testifying to lying at various points of the investigation.
Mamou, who had no prior charges of violence, was described as
‘vicious’, ‘ruthless’ and ‘cold-blooded’ during closing statements. He was also accused of murdering other individuals during the prosecution’s closing
statements.
Autopsy photos and testimony were presented to the jury, as
well as victim impact statements from victims
of crimes Charles Mamou was never charged with.
Charles Mamou was never
charged with any crime connected to Anthony Williams who died months before. The prosecution told the jury more than
once, “And he murders Anthony Williams.”
Charles Mamou has maintained his innocence for over twenty years.
TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU: Charles Mamou #999333 Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53 3872 South FM 350 Livingston, TX 77351
