As revealed in Part I, Kevin Walter, the state’s first witness, contradicted himself repeatedly on the stand. He agreed when the defense attorney questioned, “Once some police detective shows you, tells you about how we’re not worried about you and this dope case; we’re interested in prosecuting this guy, and that’s the first time you’ve come forward with information, and you had basically explained what you testified to on direct examination?”
Walter’s answer was, “Correct.”
Which makes many wonder – what is the value of snitch testimony? Is it valuable enough to sentence a man to death? It wasn’t only testimony that was given by someone involved in criminal activity, but the testimony wasn’t even able to place Charles Mamou at the scene of the crime for which he is sentenced.
According to Kevin Walter’s testimony – he came forward with information only after he was told they weren’t interested in his dope case – the interest was in prosecuting ‘this guy’ – Charles Mamou.
Kevin Walter didn’t have anything to contribute to the jury that could point to Mamou murdering the victim. But, he was able to testify regarding the drug deal and apparently avoid prosecution for his involvement.
After his testimony, the state presented some individuals who came upon the scene of the drug deal gone wrong and some detectives, but no information was shared that would point to Charles Mamou as a murderer. As a matter of fact, their testimony at times highlighted the deception of the other states’ witnesses who lied repeatedly when questioned.
And then Dion Holley took the stand. Mr. Holley was one of the individuals whose role on the night of the drug deal was to rob Charles Mamou, and after testifying against Mr. Mamou, it appears he, also, was never charged with his involvement.
Mr. Holley spoke freely about his participation in a drug deal and when asked by defense, “What were you going to meet about?” Holley replied, “About him buying some drugs.”
Holley was asked, “What was your understanding of what was going to happen at Northline?”
“That Mamou was going to trust Kevin Walter with the money.”
Defense, “How much money?”
Holley, “It was supposed to be $20,000.”
Defense, “$20,000. Trust him with the money to do what?”
Holley’s answer, “To get him some drugs.”
There was no question that the man whose testimony was being used to convict Mamou of capital murder was very involved in a drug deal and the events that took place that night.
Mr. Holley was also aware there was at least one gun involved and when asked of his associate in the drug deal, “Now did Terrence Gibson have on – in his possession, a gun?”
The answer was, “Yes.”
Mr. Holley also testified, as did Kevin Walter, that it was Dion Holley, Kevin Walter and Terrence Gibson who went and picked up seventeen year old Mary Carmouche, involving the seventeen year old in a drug deal and planned robbery. It was, according to Holley’s and Walter’s own testimony, their actions that brought Carmouche to a drug deal involving what was believed to be $20,000, a robbery and at least one gun. Again, regardless of their testimony, it appears they were never charged with anything.
Dion Holley also testified to lying to the police, just as Kevin Walter testified before him. When asked about talking to the police after the drug deal, “And did you lie to them?”
“Yes.”
Again, when asked, “Did you – so the time they first came to talk to you, you never told them the truth about what happened?”
The answer from Holley, “That’s correct.”
Not only did Dion Holley testify to lying when first questioned by the police, he also testified to lying when they questioned him again.
“Did the police come back at a later date and talk to you again?”
“Yes.”
“And were you just as uncooperative the second time they came as you were the first?”
“Yes.”
“And did you continue to tell them lies?”
And Holley’s answer was once again, “Yes.”
Dion Holley continued to testify to his own lying.
“At any point in time, did you ever tell the police a true story about what happened?”
“No.”
Again and again, Dion Holley testified to lying. “The State asked you whether or not you lied to the police when they asked you about the circumstances of this case, and you admitted lying to the police?”
“Correct.”
“And you always lied to the police about the case?”
“Correct.”
“You’ve never given them the truth about this case?”
“Correct.”
When questioned about the night of the drug deal, Dion Holley testified regarding his intentions and when asked, “What is your understanding about what your role is going to be in this plan?” Holley replies, “For me to have the drugs.”
The defense asked, “So this is the first time that your friend, lifelong friend, Kevin comes to you and says, I’ve got a plan; we’re going to rip somebody off?”
“That’s correct.”
“And that’s okay with you?”
“At the time, yes.”
“Okay. And at that time, throughout that night, it was okay with you?”
“That’s correct.”
“In fact, you played a major role in making that happen, correct?”
“That’s correct.”
When describing what he thought was going to take place at the scene of the drug deal, Holley said, “I thought he was going to hand the money over to Kevin. We was going to drive off, supposedly going to get the dope, but just get on the freeway and leave.”
And – once again – Holley testifies to lying after being asked, “The story that you told the police later about being boxed in is a lie?”
“That’s correct.”
“And you did tell them that story, right?”
“Pretty much.”
After Dion Holley left the stand, the jury knew that he testified to lying repeatedly, he was a drug dealer, and he was a key participant in a plan to rob Charles Mamou at gunpoint if necessary. He also testified that he and Kevin Walter, another witness for the state, brought the seventeen year old victim to the planned drug deal and robbery.
Apparently, Dion Holley was never charged for his participation in any of the events that took place.
TO CONTACT CHARLES MAMOU:
Charles Mamou #999333
Polunsky Unit 12-CD-53
3872 South FM 350
Livingston, TX 77351
Related Articles: What Does It Take To Get On Texas Death Row;
Texas Death Sentence Clouded By Irrefutable Doubt;
Awaiting Execution – “Have You Ever Felt Like You Can Taste The Future?”;
Because They Can – Execution In Texas;
Letter From Key Mamou Witness Contradicting Testimony;
Testimony Worthy Of An Execution? The Mamou Transcripts – Part I
REFERENCES:
Harris County, Texas. Charles Mamou, Jr. Vs. The State Of Texas. Sept. 1999.
